Tsailand Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 1 hour ago, Birdlives said: "Bruce, If you don't get something meaningful for Cousins after botching our attempts to re-sign him, you're fired." Again, if Snyder fires Bruce RIGHT NOW there is still time for the new GM to try to salvage the Kirk situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardcoreZorn Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: 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. Longtime lurker on the board, first time posting. I really am having trouble understanding why you somehow feel Cousins is being massively wronged? As others have pointed out, it's possible to not love the FO structure or Bruce/Dan and still understand that Kirk's party played their part in all of this too. It was an extremely unique situation combined with the QB market booming which created a perfect storm for Cousins to utilize the franchise tag as leverage that no other player has attempted to do before. Good for Cousins, that's his prerogative. But to sit here and act like Cousins is some golden goose who was so disrespected by our front office seems like a false narrative that you are pushing entirely too hard as truth. And now you are upset with Bruce for at least trying to recoup some sort of compensation for Cousins? Why wouldn't you want that? Are you a Cousins fan or a Redskins fan? Cousins played hardball with us and informed the Redskins he wouldn't negotiate with us until free agency. This is after not even countering last year with that "lowball offer." Does that sound like someone who wants to be here? Do you want the supposed face of your franchise basically stating that his number one goal is to be a free agent? You admit to being battered, maybe that's coloring your view of how this situation actually played out? I for one, can understand the desire and reasoning behind wanting to recoup something or anything for a valuable asset that we just lost. An asset that basically told us to go screw and potentially would have left us going into next season with NO QB. A situation you don't want to find yourself in today's NFL. God forbid the big bad Redskins FO try and get something for their franchise QB that would have just walked out the door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsailand Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 33 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said: Longtime lurker on the board, first time posting. I really am having trouble understanding why you somehow feel Cousins is being massively wronged? The way the Redskins treated Cousins was ****ty, but at the same time it hurt us a lot more than him. He can dry his tears with the $47M he has gotten from us over his career so far, not to mention the massive paycheck he will get as the only 100% healthy franchise QB to hit free agency in the free agency era. 33 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said: And now you are upset with Bruce for at least trying to recoup some sort of compensation for Cousins? Why wouldn't you want that? Because there isn't a safe way for us to do that now. We would be on the hook for his $34.5M and nobody will trade for that. 33 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said: Are you a Cousins fan or a Redskins fan? After the last six years I'm not so sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 25 minutes ago, Tsailand said: The way the Redskins treated Cousins was ****ty, but at the same time it hurt us a lot more than him. He can dry his tears with the $47M he has gotten from us over his career so far, not to mention the massive paycheck he will get as the only 100% healthy franchise QB to hit free agency in the free agency era. I don't feel it was ****ty at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 46 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said: Longtime lurker on the board, first time posting. I really am having trouble understanding why you somehow feel Cousins is being massively wronged? As others have pointed out, it's possible to not love the FO structure or Bruce/Dan and still understand that Kirk's party played their part in all of this too. It was an extremely unique situation combined with the QB market booming which created a perfect storm for Cousins to utilize the franchise tag as leverage that no other player has attempted to do before. Good for Cousins, that's his prerogative. But to sit here and act like Cousins is some golden goose who was so disrespected by our front office seems like a false narrative that you are pushing entirely too hard as truth. And now you are upset with Bruce for at least trying to recoup some sort of compensation for Cousins? Why wouldn't you want that? Are you a Cousins fan or a Redskins fan? Cousins played hardball with us and informed the Redskins he wouldn't negotiate with us until free agency. This is after not even countering last year with that "lowball offer." Does that sound like someone who wants to be here? Do you want the supposed face of your franchise basically stating that his number one goal is to be a free agent? You admit to being battered, maybe that's coloring your view of how this situation actually played out? I for one, can understand the desire and reasoning behind wanting to recoup something or anything for a valuable asset that we just lost. An asset that basically told us to go screw and potentially would have left us going into next season with NO QB. A situation you don't want to find yourself in today's NFL. God forbid the big bad Redskins FO try and get something for their franchise QB that would have just walked out the door. Probably should have just stayed lurking. Your opinion is not unique or breaking any new ground. You're certainly not the first person to put words in my mouth and create your own narrative with them. The people who liked the burp and fart you just converted into text aren't known for being right about about much of anything historically, for the record. I didn't say anything about Kirk being wronged. That's you putting words in my mouth or just an outright poor level of reading comprehension. The guy made 44M dollars on poorly placed franchise tags and will get his wish to see what else is out there sooner than later. I'm sure he's feeling quite right at this time. Nor did I say they shouldn't try to be compensated for his departure. However that ship sailed with the trade for Alex Smith. The last shred of leverage in getting any meaningful compensation for Cousins was flushed down the toilet at that time. The team had numerous opportunities to get value in return for Kirk when they still had leverage and chose not to act. There are numerous reasons why Kirk Cousins will have teams lining up for his services. There are also numerous reasons why if Bruce was fired today, he wouldn't be hired tomorrow. One guy has a track record as a classy individual that's good at his job. The other has a bad reputation and an even worse track record at his actual job. You can keep making this about Kirk to make yourself feel better, but it doesn't change the facts. The QB not wanting to be here says a lot more about here than it does the QB. Guys don't choose the unknown over what they know for a few bucks. Just to be clear, in the event this continues to escape you, nothing I've ever posted is about Kirk being wronged. It's about Bruce being wrong, over and over and over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardcoreZorn Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 23 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: Just to be clear, in the event this continues to escape you, nothing I've ever posted is about Kirk being wronged. It's about Bruce being wrong, over and over and over again. Sorry, for some reason when you stated "No other franchise would hold a player hostage to play for them," I interpreted that as you believing your golden boy Kirk was being wronged by big bad Brucey and Dan. Surely, my mistake. See, when you are constantly trying to push this agenda that Bruce is so incredibly wrong all the time, you come off as overly sympathetic to Cousins and his agent for how they handled this. You may never have claimed specifically "Kirk was wronged" and I certainly never alluded to the fact you were worried about his financial well-being. You are just so incredibly blinded by your hatred of Bruce that you don't present an accurate portrayal of the situation at hand. Your Username is BatteredFanSyndrome and you have openly discussed that the Redskins and Dan Snyder and Bruce Allen have you fed up. Again, is it even a little bit possible that your personal frustration has caught up with you and that affects the way you post? I'm not a Bruce fan. I'm surely not going to be confused as a Dan Snyder fanboy either. I can still see this situation for what it is though, while you continue to stomp up and down about how wrong everything they do is. It's just a bit obnoxious is all. Also, I'll continue to post but thanks for the welcoming words! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 @HardcoreZorn So basically what you're saying is sorry for misinterpreting everything I said and spinning it to how you think it comes off, in an effort to look cool with the few misguided souls that share your opinion. Apology accepted. Now if only you'd apologize for not arguing anything that I actually did say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dont Taze Me Bro Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 I'm definitely the fat kid in that scenario. Poor kid tried to pick a fight as if I'm not going to take this fight to the ground and sit on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PF Chang Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Most of the recent trade discussion has been illogical and wishful thinking, but the Browns are the one team who could actually bite. Cousins probably wouldn't choose them in FA, they'd only need to give up a 3rd, and I think they'll actually need to spend to get above the minimum cap number. Probably not going to happen though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardcoreZorn Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 29 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: @HardcoreZorn So basically what you're saying is sorry for misinterpreting everything I said and spinning it to how you think it comes off, in an effort to look cool with the few misguided souls that share your opinion. Apology accepted. Now if only you'd apologize for not arguing anything that I actually did say. No, what I actually said was that you seem to push agendas and false narratives due to your hatred of the FO structure. We've all witnessed the disaster that has been Dan Snyder's ownership. I just think you reached a breaking point (astute observation, I know) and its compromising your ability to dissect what's actually going on. Again, this was all in reference to your comment "Only the Redskins would hold a player hostage to play for them." First of all, what does that even mean? Second, what the hell does that mean?! It was Kirk and his agent that had us by the balls, not the other way around. If there were a possibility to acquire some kind of compensation (even if its just a third/fourth this year) why would you not want us to pursue that? And not only not pursue it, but then take the angle that we are holding Kirk hostage? Again, try and keep up here, but you saying something like this inadvertently paints a picture that the Redskins organization is a bunch of bad guys and Kirk deserves to hit the open market no questions asked. We had no leverage to trade Kirk before Alex Smith and acquiring him didn't change that. Where we could potentially stand to gain is if a team or teams are competing for his services and create a market for Kirk in exchange for not letting him hit the open market. Whether it works or not, I have no idea. But I'm not going to whine about Bruce pursuing that option and act like Kirk is being held hostage. Kirk played hardball with us and we moved on. Now I want to continue to do what is best for the Washington Redskins and that aligns with exploring a tag and trade scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 7 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said: I just think you reached a breaking point (astute observation, I know) and its compromising your ability to dissect what's actually going on. I think it's been pretty clear for about 19 years: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 22 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said: No, what I actually said was that you seem to push agendas and false narratives due to your hatred of the FO structure. We've all witnessed the disaster that has been Dan Snyder's ownership. I just think you reached a breaking point (astute observation, I know) and its compromising your ability to dissect what's actually going on. Again, this was all in reference to your comment "Only the Redskins would hold a player hostage to play for them." First of all, what does that even mean? Second, what the hell does that mean?! It was Kirk and his agent that had us by the balls, not the other way around. If there were a possibility to acquire some kind of compensation (even if its just a third/fourth this year) why would you not want us to pursue that? And not only not pursue it, but then take the angle that we are holding Kirk hostage? Again, try and keep up here, but you saying something like this inadvertently paints a picture that the Redskins organization is a bunch of bad guys and Kirk deserves to hit the open market no questions asked Unfortunately there is nothing good to say about much that's went on in some time. One thing that gets twisted here is that folks that hold similar opinions to my own is that we think everything Bruce does is trash. That's not true at all. It's literally impossible to eff up everything. The problem is he really messes up the big things. I'm not going to pat the guy on the back for resigning Mason Foster at a good deal, on the heels of how he's handled so many larger issues that negatively impact the organization. At my job, if I get all the little stuff right but eff up the big deliverables, I'm getting fired. That's typically how life works. As for my hostage statement, I meant that it was clear last summer if not before that Kirk wasn't dealing with Bruce. Rather than work trades or kiss ass, Bruce stayed put and paid Kirk 24M because he wasn't about to send him anywhere he'd want to go. A highly paid hostage but hostage-like nonetheless. My greater point is that I dont see another franchise willing to risk paying a guy 34M to play as a rental. The risk to us is not worth the potential reward. It's not about Kirk deserving to walk free and clear, it's about Bruce creating a scenario where that's going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeken24 Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 So I heard today that the Redskins are considering franchising Kirk in order to trade him. Hmm. So someone on this forum was adamant that there would be no leverage in doing this. We'll see...... So I go back to my post about Kirk and how he's been looking to move, but maintaining verbally that he wants to be a Redskins. We all knew that Kirk wanted to move. Otherwise, he would have at least countered the offer last year before signing the franchise. On top of that, he is not willing to negotiate a contract until after July 16th this year . Free agency starts mid March. That means if the Redskins had honored Kirk's wishes regarding the above dates, they would have been waiting for his answer, while getting blasted by us fans and media, only to be left in the cold when he decides to leave. What do they do? They go out and get a good QB before the pickin's is slim. In essence, Kirk was stickin' it to the Redskins. So I suppose by franchising Kirk , you kill two birds in one stone. Tag period opens on Feb 20th and ends on Mar 6th. You leverage the fact that he's a hot commodity and try to get something for him in a trade during the draft. You'll have between Mar 6th and July 16th. The draft starts on April 26th which is smack dab in the middle of the franchise tag period. Trust me!!... someones going to give you a player and/or a high pick for Kirk. You trade him to that team (no matter who it is) and you're done with the other bird. Kirk is going to another team. I could give a damn if he gets to go play for a ****ing "winner". Oh btw, you provide yourself a little bit of leverage during the draft. You get to take early calls from teams about him, thus providing you with a little bit more intel on other team's needs. This is business. **** doin' somebody dirty. Particularly when its clear Kirk was doing this team dirty....with a plad shirt and a smile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passepartout Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 Yeah but Kirk seems to be a classy guy. But it is a business no matter what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Barbour Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 I applaud the front office for not committing to Kirk and paying a mid level QB top dollar before he proved he can supplement that amount of money with results of carrying a franchise. We ended up with a better option for cheaper. No re-sign Brown with that money and bring another talent in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobandweave Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 5 hours ago, carex said: I don't feel it was ****ty at all. If it was I wish someone would treat me that way. I see 44 million reasons why I’d want that lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobandweave Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 2 hours ago, Passepartout said: Yeah but Kirk seems to be a classy guy. But it is a business no matter what. Just because he is PC doesn’t make him classy to me. They are very different things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeken24 Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 3 hours ago, Passepartout said: Yeah but Kirk seems to be a classy guy. But it is a business no matter what. "Seems" is the operative word. How many guys in a hoodie or a leather jacket and cowboy boots would you call classy? I used to think some NBA players were classy, until I went to summer camp in Vegas. Perception is reality until reality becomes real. Then perception becomes wet dog ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 3 minutes ago, joeken24 said: Perception is reality until reality becomes real. Then perception becomes wet dog ****. ...once said a great philosopher. That's so deep I'm ashamed to have read it back a few times and still can't figure out where that was going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeken24 Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 1 minute ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: ...once said a great philosopher. That's so deep I'm ashamed to have read it back a few times and still can't figure out where that was going. Nothing like a little honey jack philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan73 Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 On 04/02/2018 at 2:04 AM, SkinsFTW said: This years"team friendly contract" is last years "no frickin way he's worth that" Hilarious Cousins was offered more than Smith got and turned it down. Cousins does not deserve to be the highest paid qb. If he had signed for what was offered in 17 this would all be moot. Go get paid hamstring some other team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 6 hours ago, joeken24 said: So I heard today that the Redskins are considering franchising Kirk in order to trade him. Hmm. So someone on this forum was adamant that there would be no leverage in doing this. We'll see...... So I go back to my post about Kirk and how he's been looking to move, but maintaining verbally that he wants to be a Redskins. We all knew that Kirk wanted to move. Otherwise, he would have at least countered the offer last year before signing the franchise. On top of that, he is not willing to negotiate a contract until after July 16th this year . Free agency starts mid March. That means if the Redskins had honored Kirk's wishes regarding the above dates, they would have been waiting for his answer, while getting blasted by us fans and media, only to be left in the cold when he decides to leave. What do they do? They go out and get a good QB before the pickin's is slim. In essence, Kirk was stickin' it to the Redskins. So I suppose by franchising Kirk , you kill two birds in one stone. Tag period opens on Feb 20th and ends on Mar 6th. You leverage the fact that he's a hot commodity and try to get something for him in a trade during the draft. You'll have between Mar 6th and July 16th. The draft starts on April 26th which is smack dab in the middle of the franchise tag period. Trust me!!... someones going to give you a player and/or a high pick for Kirk. You trade him to that team (no matter who it is) and you're done with the other bird. Kirk is going to another team. I could give a damn if he gets to go play for a ****ing "winner". Oh btw, you provide yourself a little bit of leverage during the draft. You get to take early calls from teams about him, thus providing you with a little bit more intel on other team's needs. This is business. **** doin' somebody dirty. Particularly when its clear Kirk was doing this team dirty....with a plad shirt and a smile. Not sure I was adamant - but I do believe there is very little leverage so I will address this one. To start you are seeing the benefits but ignoring the consequences. Also, you are really missing the point that many of us are not as upset with the move to Smith itself as the process that got them here. But first things first. First the tag and trade issue - To tag and trade the Redskins need to put the Exclusive Tag on him. There are two paths at that time: 1. Kirk refuses to sign the tag. In this scenario the team cannot trade him but he cannot look for another team. So he takes himself off the market. However, he can sign at any time putting the Redskins on the hook for $34M. Once the first few weeks go by, just like he would not have any many suitors the Redskins will not have as many trade partners reducing the value in making the move. In the meantime that $34M is on the Redskins CAP limiting their ability to sign FAs. The last I saw they had a bout $60M in CAP - may be as much as $64M. However, with Alex Smith ($17M this year I believe) and Kirk on the books for $34M, that leaves $15M to $9M. They need about $10M for draft picks. Best case they have $4M or $5M for FAs. That means they cannot even resign anyone they have, much less sign other players. The team could rescind the offer at some point - say after FA starts but before the draft. They will still not be able use the CAP room until then. It's a very dangerous game of chicken. They tried this twice wit Kirk and his agent and they have yet to blink 2. Kirk signs the tag. This would help the Redskins in that they could trade him without his permission. However, he could refuse to agree to a LTD with that team. Despite some suggesting that someone may be OK with a one year $34M rental, that is just wishful thinking. If someone does that, they will be unemployed next year. Again, that CAP is on the Redskins books until a deal is made. With no suitor willing to take his contract - at least not as is, we could have $50M in QBs with one sitting on the bench - the one who has been the starter the last 3 yrs with all his team mates looking on. That will create the mother of all locker room friction. Both those options will sour players on wanting to come her or stay here. You can say that's does't matter. But it will impact the team heavily. Maybe not this year but certainly next. In then end it's just too big a risk. Just move on already. The only real chance is the time between Feb 20th and March 6th. You still lose the CAP space but you could try to make a tag and trade work during just that time. But once the tag or else date comes, you have to jsut let him go. Again, it's jsut too risky and you tie your hands. In the order of events you have couple things wrong. Not bad wrong, but still incorrect. 1. I have to assume you just either misunderstood or it's typo when you said Kirk said he is not willing to even discuss a contract until after July 16th. That is just plain not true. He said he wanted to see what free agency would bring. That means he would not talk until after the tag deadline so the team has to either tag him, or let him go. 2. He could still have negotiated last year even after he signed the tag. They have until mid July. So not sure how that shows anything him signing the tag. Now he did decide not to counter Bruce's first offer. I am not big on the whole god told him not to stuff to be honest. But from a business standpoint it was a smart move. Also Bruce should have made another offer. I agree once it was clear he wanted to wait, going out and getting a deal for Alex was not the worst move. I think they gave up a little too much but not as bad as some others. But I would have preferred to keep Fuller and honestly just given them the 2nd they want. It's just one spot and you keep a player you already know can play here. But you are talking about this in a vacuum. What has more people upset than the trade itself is the stupidity that got them here. It should never have gotten this far. And as far as Cousins treating the team like **** - sorry but that is way off base. I disagree with other that the team has treated Kirk poorly outside the contract thing. But he has just played the game better - pure and simple. Nothing dirty about it. And he has a right to say he will not negotiate until a certain time. It would have been dirty to talk with them all the time knowing no matter what offer they made he has not taking it. You clearly do not like Kirk. OK, fair enough. But c'mom you are really stretching here with some of the accusations. The FO, specifically Bruce Allen have hosed this entire thing up. They needed to get him signed before going into this last season, But they wanted to play low-ball. They got busted. Now they had to give up a draft pick and a good young player to get a 4 yr older Kirk at about the same money they could have had Kirk for last year!! That is just plain stupid. The deal itself in a vacuum I don't hate. It should be interesting to see how Alex Smith does with Jay's offense. It's a bit more aggressive than Ried's. Need to get him a running game and a WR to go with Crowder and Doctson. And hope we stay more healthy. But what the hell - I will be rooting for him in September for sure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins island connection Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 14 hours ago, Tsailand said: Again, if Snyder fires Bruce RIGHT NOW there is still time for the new GM to try to salvage the Kirk situation. Honestly, there's nothing to salvage with the KC situation. The FO screwed the pooch big time. It pissed off KC and now he doesn't want to be here. The FO has already signed another QB, no point in playing Russian roulette with the salary cap. As everyone knows, if anything can go wrong, it will. Forget trying to get a 3rd or 4th pick by signing KC then trying to deal him elsewhere, it just doesn't look good, it resembles prostitution, and it just may not find any suitors interested. Bruce is liable to get a last minute brainstorm and demand a 2nd rd pick or some other crazy stipulation, and it ends up ripping our salary cap to shreds. No point in taking that chance all for a pick that will probably not be worth a crap anyway. Just let it go. Just let Cousins go. Just let the entire thing go away. This team has been through enough crap already, why does anyone want to continue the misery. IT IS NOT WORTH IT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbunny Posted February 6, 2018 Share Posted February 6, 2018 33 minutes ago, skins island connection said: Honestly, there's nothing to salvage with the KC situation. The FO screwed the pooch big time. It pissed off KC and now he doesn't want to be here. The FO has already signed another QB, no point in playing Russian roulette with the salary cap. As everyone knows, if anything can go wrong, it will The trade won't be official until march the 14th. So we could still back off from it as unpopular as it would be with other FO. Having a change in our FO could make Kirk and his agent change their point of view on us as well, getting them back to the negociation table. It might not be enough but that would be a sign his direction. From what we know, even if Dan is the problem, he likes Kirk and called him after the trade, as Jay. Bruce didn't. So a change in our FO would probably change many things. Will it be done? That's highly unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.