WP: Kirk Cousins breaks his silence after Redskins trade for Alex Smith

[Reaper Skins]

The other part that annoys me is that they decided to tag Cousins twice but never felt the need to draft a serious QB talent in either year to serve as a possible back up plan for Kirk leaving. 

 

The lack of foresight there, in regards to having a QB development pipeline in place, was really handled poorly.

[skinzplay]

I'm going to agree with the perspective of  @goskins10 on this one, particularly that the FO was absolutely moronic in letting Cousins walk without getting anything in return for him, coupled with obtaining Smith by giving up a 3rd AND an extraordinarily talented and YOUNG defensive back. I'm still pissed about Fuller. They botched it, plain and simple, and the Brewer piece that @Skinsinparadise shared is spot on! 

[Skinsinparadise]

19 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said:

Jerry speaking in hindsight just like mlst people here. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/ftw.usatoday.com/2016/03/washington-redskins-kirk-cousins-contract-franchise-tag-scot-mccloughan/amp

 

 

His whole point is good organizations are run with foresight.   Scot in retrospect has more foresight (and i like the dude) than I gave him credit for because one of the narratives about him is no tag.  Its LTD or trade.  Did I want to trade Kirk in 2017?  Nope.  Would I wanted to do so if it ended up this way?  Heck yes.  I am not in the building talking to the agent and getting a feel for the player -- they are.  I am not paid to make decisions like this.  They are.  Scot clearly felt it wouldn't end well.  He was right.  Did he play a part in the 2016 issues -- looks to be the case.  But apparently he saw the writing on the wall in 2017. Bruce didn't.  He's in the middle of the action and paid to read the tea leaves.  

 

19 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said:

 

And I’m really struggling to find all of these posts patting the FO for a job well done. By franchising him twice and not soliciting trade offers, it’s fairly obvious our intent was to keep him all along. Couple that with Bruce’s reported spitefulness toward McCartney, and Jays visible frustration and message that it was time to move on from a player who didn’t want to be part of the Redskins, it’s not hard to visualize a scenario where Kirk and McCartney grabbed us by the balls collected 44M bones and still obtained the ultimate goal to ride off into the sunset into unrestricted FA. Good for them. But I’m not going to slam the Redskins FO for how this one played out. I’ll slam them for a million other things

 

You mention a bunch of things they did wrong and then say i am not going to slam them for how they handled this.  And you also went hey I never said I am patting them on the back for it.  Tough for me to work all of those points together -- are you saying they handled it OK?  You don't love it, don't hate it -- but no big deal -- so they get a pass for it, its neutral? Just trying to zero in on your overall point on this.

 

19 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said:

 when you really try hard not to operate in hindsight and take context into account here, it’s not absurd to have a POV that Bruce and Dan may not have royally screwed this one up like many have you on here believing. 

 

 

I guess lets agree to disagree on that one.  I've argued plenty of points where there is a heavy nuanced component where I can see it go either way.  Heck the Kirk-Alex comparisons to me is a perfect example of it.  I get both sides of the aisle as to who is better.  I can even get those who like the trade even though I disagree because I think the compensation was too steep.  But yeah the idea that they handled this contract fine - to me is absurd.  Absurd isn't even a strong enough word to sum it up for me.  But everyone is entitled to their opinion.  Any anger in my posts typically aren't directed to the poster but the object of my disdain, in this case that's Bruce. 

 

 

[WelshSkinsFan]

4 minutes ago, Reaper Skins said:

The other part that annoys me is that they decided to tag Cousins twice but never felt the need to draft a serious QB talent in either year to serve as a possible back up plan for Kirk leaving. 

 

The lack of foresight there, in regards to having a QB development pipeline in place, was really handled poorly.

 

The sad thing is that we did do that.  We drafted Sudfeld 2 years ago and by year 2 of the tag drama he was developing nicely and then we boneheadedly tried to smuggle him to the PS when we needed to sign a street FA for the OL and got scooped by the Eagles.  I don't think I am alone in saying I would have been ok with starting Sudfeld this year if we lost Kirk and using the savings to beef up the rest of the roster.  We still could have gone for a guy like Rudolph too as we would have all of our picks.

[Llevron]

I expect that he is going to fail wherever he goes and it wont be because of his talent. His attitude has always been his issue. Going back RG3 running the ball into the endzone against the Vikes, the only person on the team without a smile on his face was Kirk. That said alot to me then and it says alot to me now. Hes not a team player and that **** comes through on a football team. 

 

Glad hes gone. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

4 minutes ago, Llevron said:

I expect that he is going to fail wherever he goes and it wont be because of his talent. His attitude has always been his issue. Going back RG3 running the ball into the endzone against the Vikes, the only person on the team without a smile on his face was Kirk. That said alot to me then and it says alot to me now. Hes not a team player and that **** comes through on a football team. 

 

Glad hes gone. 

 

Obviously, you're free to feel however you want.  I vaguely remember the play you're talking about but definitely don't remember anyone's reactions to it.  But I'd like to hope you have better examples of his poor attitude and that he's not a team player.  RG3, really?  You don't give dude a pass for not loving Griffin?  It was rather well documented that Robert was a total diva, even holding his own press conference after Kirk got his first win as a pro. 

[Llevron]

1 minute ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

Obviously, you're free to feel however you want.  I vaguely remember the play you're talking about but definitely don't remember anyone's reactions to it.  But I'd like to hope you have better examples of his poor attitude and that he's not a team player.  RG3, really?  You don't give dude a pass for not loving Griffin?  It was rather well documented that Robert was a total diva, even holding his own press conference after Kirk got his first win as a pro. 

 

Im just telling you how I feel about it. I honestly dont care how you want to characterize it to fit your own bull this morning. I clearly didnt say anything about not loving Griffin. Im talking about a touchdown play in a game that was very close until that point. It was an example. There are multiple and im sure you will post your way though those as well so I have no interest. Your making it about Griffin shows your own obsession, not mine. 

 

I have always suspected thats more of what this was about for many of you than anything. 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

11 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

Obviously, you're free to feel however you want.  I vaguely remember the play you're talking about but definitely don't remember anyone's reactions to it.  But I'd like to hope you have better examples of his poor attitude and that he's not a team player.  RG3, really?  You don't give dude a pass for not loving Griffin?  It was rather well documented that Robert was a total diva, even holding his own press conference after Kirk got his first win as a pro. 

 

I think it just comes with the turf, the one leaving is the bad boy.  I think its funny that its extending now to Kirk who is about as PG as it gets.  As Cooley liked to say (I am paraphrasing), you got a gazillion guys in that locker room, the law of numbers is such with all the personalities, that not everyone is going to like each other.  He's dealt with Kirk personally multiple times -- said good dude.  Having said that, its sort of like when a relationship breaks up -- usually the rosy stories don't come up in the aftermath, instead its typically good riddance.   I get that it makes sense.  I do it, too.

 

If I had to go after Kirk's personality it would actually be the reverse of poor attitude.  It would be the dude could use some bad boy in him, perhaps.  But to each their own.   Alex Smith is a bit of a similar cat -- very PG, nice guy -- though more the California laid back version of it.

 

 

[Alexa]

The bottom line is Kirk is going to be overpaid. The expectations and pressure is going to be immense. If he goes to the Vikings the bar will be NFC Championship.  It will be interesting to see how he handles that pressure. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

8 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

Im just telling you how I feel about it. I honestly dont care how you want to characterize it to fit your own bull this morning. I clearly didnt say anything about not loving Griffin. Im talking about a touchdown play in a game that was very close until that point. It was an example. There are multiple and im sure you will post your way though those as well so I have no interest. Your making it about Griffin shows your own obsession, not mine. 

 

I have always suspected thats more of what this was about for many of you than anything. 

 

 

 

I'm the one with the obsession with Griffin.  Mmmkay.  Don't get mad at me because you brought up ancient insignificant history to make a bad point.

 

But you are correct in that's more of what this is about for quite a few folks here.

[Llevron]

I have never liked Kirks attitude and you can go back on this site years and see that. I accepted it cause he was the QB and yall have raging erections for the guy but I personally never liked him. Everything about him and the love fest he got rubbed me the wrong way. 

 

Very often I would hope for the best and even agree with yall for the sake of keeping the peace since I assumed he would be here for a while. But real being real I never digged the guy and him leaving doesnt change that for me lol. 

 

 

2 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

I'm the one with the obsession with Griffin.  Mmmkay.  Don't get mad at me because you brought up ancient insignificant history to make a bad point.

 

But you are correct in that's more of what this is about for quite a few folks here.

 

I mean, if you gonna sit here and act like you dont bring up RG3 a few times a week in here then what can I say to bring your sanity back? 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 minute ago, Llevron said:

I have never liked Kirks attitude and you can go back on this site years and see that. I accepted it cause he was the QB and yall have raging erections for the guy but I personally never liked him. Everything about him and the love fest he got rubbed me the wrong way. 

 

Very often I would hope for the best and even agree with yall for the sake of keeping the peace since I assumed he would be here for a while. But real being real I never digged the guy and him leaving doesnt change that for me lol. 

 

 

Yeah, we know the primary reason why many of you never liked him.

 

I've personally been all over the map on him and the prior QB.  My opinions evolved over time rather than remaining stuck on stupid. 

[Llevron]

2 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Yeah, we know the primary reason why many of you never liked him.

 

5 picks a game for his first few starts was killer for me. His attitude was the cherry. 

 

2 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

I've personally been all over the map on him and the prior QB.  My opinions evolved over time rather than remaining stuck on stupid. 

 

Yes. You have quite the reputation on here lol. Everyone totally sees you as level headed and fair on the matter. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

5 minutes ago, Llevron said:

I mean, if you gonna sit here and act like you dont bring up RG3 a few times a week in here then what can I say to bring your sanity back? 

Please go find all my RG3 mentions that I make a few times a week.  Please don't return until you're ready to apologize.

[Llevron]

2 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Please go find all my RG3 mentions that I make a few times a week.  Please don't return until you're ready to apologize.

 

Im sorry you are upset? 

 

We both know im not going to go back through your posts. Feel free to keep hope alive though. Just like with your baby Kirk lol

52 minutes ago, Reaper Skins said:

The other part that annoys me is that they decided to tag Cousins twice but never felt the need to draft a serious QB talent in either year to serve as a possible back up plan for Kirk leaving. 

 

The lack of foresight there, in regards to having a QB development pipeline in place, was really handled poorly.

 

Its **** like this that will always keep us from being a good team. There is no excuse for not being prepared for something they spent three years pretending they weren't going to do. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

2 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

Im sorry you are upset? 

 

We both know im not going to go back through your posts. Feel free to keep hope alive though. Just like with your baby Kirk lol

 

No, the point was that you'd never find it nor apologize for lying, and then I would only have to see your whiny posts in the tailgate.

[Est.1974]

The FO clearly didn't handle this great at the outset, but for quite some time it's been a dead deal. I would guess, just my take, that Kirk has truly been reluctant to ever have a long term deal here. His preference seems to be shorter term agreements. We may well see that in his next contract, with indications being he may want a 3 year high % guaranteed deal. 

 

They have backed Grudens scheme over the need for an elite QB, or in fact a QB in general on elite money. They believe his scheme will operate just fine with a 'very good' veteran QB at the helm. Cousins and Smith are both that, neither is elite, the key difference being Cousins will likely command a deal some 30% per annum greater than Smiths. 

 

Doug said as much in his interview, Jay scheme will get you 4000 yards through the air, we just need a damn RB to add another chunk of yardage.

 

Good luck to Kirk wherever he heads. Time to concentrate on backing Smith.

 

[Llevron]

1 minute ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

No, the point was that you'd never find it nor apologize for lying, and then I would only have to see your whiny posts in the tailgate.

 

See i struck a nerve lol. You always bring my tailgate posts into this. Has it become that personal to you? But funny you get mad when people say you are obsessed with RG3. Arnt you the one who coined Anti-Kirk? And didnt you just post this?

 

23 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

But you are correct in that's more of what this is about for quite a few folks here.

 

So you are cool characterizing it that way for quite a few folks but someone else says it about you and its time for apologies and you have revoked my pass to your thread huh? 

 

Get out of here. I think you know I was never talking to you to begin with anyway. Can I have a conversation on here without you ****izing every post to satisfy whatever messed up desire it is you have for Kirk? 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

6 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

See i struck a nerve lol. You always bring my tailgate posts into this. Has it become that personal to you? But funny you get mad when people say you are obsessed with RG3. Arnt you the one who coined Anti-Kirk? And didnt you just post this?

 

 

I don't even post in the tailgate very often and my political opinions align more with your own, but I am observant and stand by my observations.

 

What I'm specifically talking about here is that you said that I'm the one who brings up RG3 in multiples posts every week.  That is simply not true.  In fact, you're the one who brought him up in here.

 

As for AntiKirk, yes I believe I coined that.  Not all AntiKirks are built the same though.  But one common trait found in a majority of that contingent is yeah - you guessed it. 

[mistertim]

I'm just glad this saga is going to be over soon. I wish we had never even drafted the guy and we could have avoided all this nonsense as both sides have looked bad at the end of the day. We ended up with a good but not great QB who obviously hasn't wanted a LTD here for a while, who milked us for money knowing that while talking out both sides of his mouth regarding the issue, who thinks he's worth being the highest paid player in the NFL, and who led us to nothing but one playoff loss where he essentially did nothing. Meanwhile our FO has been idiots for not realizing this, for fanning the flames of resentment on Kirk and his agent's side, and for not trying to trade him for something decent after the 2016 season. No apparent long term plan after seeing the very real possibility that Kirk simply didn't want to be here and was planning on taking the money and running. Just an all around joke. Good luck to him wherever he goes, but I won't exactly be cheering for him after this whole fiasco.

[Llevron]

3 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

As for AntiKirk, yes I believe I coined that.  Not all AntiKirks are built the same though.  But one common trait found in a majority of that contingent is yeah - you guessed it. 

 

Right. So you have always been in this thread, painting people as RG3 homers when they disagree with you (because that has to be the reason) but the minute it happens to you, you are pissing and moaning like someone owes you something. Get over yourself. And while you are at it get over Kirk or become a Vikings fan. 

 

Im sure you dont actually talk about rg3 weekly if that's what has your overly sensitive panties in a wad. But you do bring him up often enough to make a cat wonder. I mean in your post above you admit that the term you took it upon yourself to create is a term for categorizing people YOU think support Griffin still. So, what does that say? For those keeping score dude created a term for people who he thinks are still RG3 fans and uses it often. But saying he brings up RG3 is a sin. 

 

Makes sense to me

 

Kirk's gone. Get used to it. Make up AntiSmiths and go falaciate yourself to cousins stats. Also major internet points for having the balls to call my tailgate posts whinny, but not having the balls to actually come and debate any of them. Real classy. 

[PF Chang]

The "pro-Kirk" view has consistently been along these lines: 

 

He's a franchise QB, though not a top 5 guy. Probably in the #10 range. The "next QB up" always gets paid more than it seems like he's worth at that exact time, but it will look like a bargain a few years later. There is a reason no other franchise QB has ever been a free agent in his prime (barring injury concerns of Brees/Manning). It's not because we are smarter than everyone else. It's absurd to end up with possibly a late 3rd round pick for Cousins when teams can get a 1st rounder and more for Sam ****ing Bradford. The front office has royally screwed this up because they lack foresight. It's reasonable that Cousins would want to leave this organization and that's why as the dysfunction increased, he didn't counter offer. 

 

Meanwhile the anti-Kirk view has become progressively more ridiculous:

 

He's a decent QB but not worth the money, and we'd be better off using the savings elsewhere. OK, I disagree based on the reality of the market, but that is a reasonable view. 

 

He hasn't led us to <insert arbitrary benchmark>. It's a team game. Let's cut all of our best players since they haven't won playoff games either then. 

 

Still though I think it's a reasonable disagreement at this point. But we keep going.

 

He's greedy. Sorry, it's obvious that he didn't want to bet on this organization for the rest of his career. Would you go with Dan/Bruce if you had a choice?

 

Paying Kirk $25M/year would destroy the team! Then we give up a 3rd and Fuller for another QB and promptly extend his deal at around $22M/year. Crickets.  

 

We're going to tag and trade him for early round picks! People patiently explained why that made no sense. The debate equivalent of playing tennis with a brick wall ensued. 

 

We should tag him out of pure spite anyway. I've actually seen this argument. That's childish beyond belief, and yet I actually worry that Dan operates on that level. If it's true that we could have traded him to SF a year ago and Dan wouldn't because he didn't want the potential embarrassment, that is just another example of stupid and childish management. 

 

He's overplayed his hand! Nobody is going to sign him! Ugh. 

 

Long story short I'm seeing one side with a consistent argument that makes sense. The other side starts on solid ground and gets shakier until it's a hot take earthquake. That should tell you something.

 

Probably the most extreme thing on the pro-Kirk side is the idea of changing team loyalty. Well that's been happening for years now if you take a look at our home crowds and local TV ratings. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Llevron]

The good news is most of this will be put to be by the end of his career I guess. I hope for arguments sake he does go to the best team, not the highest paying one. So that we can kill the greedy thing and actually see if we (Redskins, not us AntiKirks) were right in dropping him or as we all expect from these guys, dead ass wrong. 

 

In the end there is nothing we can do but argue over it until then. 

 

There is no question the FO is the bad guys here. Even if I dont like Kirk I can tell you 100% for a fact if we were a better run team this would not even be an issue. 

[HardcoreZorn]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

His whole point is good organizations are run with foresight.   Scot in retrospect has more foresight (and i like the dude) than I gave him credit for because one of the narratives about him is no tag.  Its LTD or trade.  Did I want to trade Kirk in 2017?  Nope.  Would I wanted to do so if it ended up this way?  Heck yes.  I am not in the building talking to the agent and getting a feel for the player -- they are.  I am not paid to make decisions like this.  They are.  Scot clearly felt it wouldn't end well.  He was right.  Did he play a part in the 2016 issues -- looks to be the case.  But apparently he saw the writing on the wall in 2017. Bruce didn't.  He's in the middle of the action and paid to read the tea leaves.

It doesn't work like that though. You can't say you wouldn't have wanted to trade Kirk, but would have if you knew it would have ended up this way. You had to make a decision there and then, and it sounds like yours would have been to hang onto Kirk. And subsequently fall into the same trap Dan/Bruce fell into. Unless it was made very clear by Kirk and McCartney that he would never under any circumstances sign a LTD with the Redskins, you cannot as someone who did not support the idea of trading Kirk now get all up in arms about the no compensation aspect. You are now operating under the assumption you would have known what you knew now, which you wouldn't have. The only ground you would have to stand on is if it came out that Kirk straight up told Bruce and Dan he would never sign here, and we still hung onto him for one more year and essentially killing his trade value. I think we both know, and it has come straight from the horse's mouth himself, that Kirk never made that abundantly clear. He's been talking out both sides of his mouth, trying to keep all of his options open. It's why I think Scott was special. I truly believe Scott for the most part (he has some misses just like all of the best still do) had an innate ability to wade through all of the noise and make good sound decisions in the best interest of the football team. Which is why I was and still am crushed he is no longer here.

 

Dan HATES negative press more than anything. Trading him last off-season would have lead to the very same people crying about no compensation this year bringing out the pitchforks saying "We finally found a franchise QB and we just traded him away, how stupid can they be?". Stories of how Dan let Brad Johnson and Trent Green and now Kirk Cousins walk would have run rampant. I have a feeling Jay/Bruce/Dan thought by not fielding trade offers for Kirk they were sending a clear message to Kirk and his team that he was our guy. It didn't work.

 

Quote

 

 

You mention a bunch of things they did wrong and then say i am not going to slam them for how they handled this.  And you also went hey I never said I am patting them on the back for it.  Tough for me to work all of those points together -- are you saying they handled it OK?  You don't love it, don't hate it -- but no big deal -- so they get a pass for it, its neutral? Just trying to zero in on your overall point on this.

A bunch of things they did wrong is referring to many other decisions and aspects surrounding the football team, not just the Kirk Cousins situation. This topic is obviously at the forefront of debate surrounding the Redskins so many of my posts on here have had to do with Kirk and Bruce.

 

My stance is this:

 

1.) The biggest FO mistake in this whole ordeal was not recognizing earlier that Griffin was damaged goods. Griffin revitalized this fan base during the 2012 season. I'm sure Dan FINALLY thought he got it right. He had one of the most exciting young players in football and continued to cling onto the idea that he would revive himself and capture that 2012 magic. It was pretty clear that was not going to happen after 2013 and 2014. Waiting so long made it harder to have a large enough sample size in games to evaluate Kirk on and make a firm decision before his rookie contract expired. This is how we entered the franchise tag ordeal.

 

2.) Kirk never truly wanted to be here from the beginning. There are quotes of him not being happy to be drafted here originally. He took personal offense to not being the guy here, and always operated from the standpoint that one day he would get his shot somewhere else. He's always been the underdog and dating back to college never had his personal choice or pick of the litter on where to play. He was an afterthought dating back to high school I've read. His actions and words about wanting to feel wanted and believed in confirms this idea. Resigning and making a long term commitment to the team he never really wanted to get drafted to in the first place was never a serious option for him.

 

3.) The 3 year 19.5 year deal thrown out in 2016 by he and his agent was a hail mary attempt at the time. A very small fraction of the fan base at the time would have been cool with that decision. Even so, it was still only three years, basically the same amount of time the team could control his rights via the franchise tag. It was not some genuine attempt on Kirk and McCartney's part to form a long term partnership with the Redskins that we shut down, even though that's how it is being spun around here.

 

4.) It was last off season that Kirk and McCartney began to realize they held all of the cards. They knew the Redskins wanted to keep him, but that by franchise tagging him for a second time there was little to no incentive to negotiate a long term deal. Hence why no counter offer was made. He was one year away from receiving 34M GTD for one more year or hitting the open market, his ultimate goal all along. Kirk and his agent realized they had a real chance to do something no legitimate franchise QB who was ever done - hit the open market. I've thrown the term trailblazer around here quite a bit. Kirk had an opportunity to affect how QB negotiations were handled all around the league. That must have been exciting for him, the ability to influence QB contracts and make his mark on the league. With all of that taken into account, no good faith negotiations were made on behalf of Kirk and his agent. And they wouldn't even speak with us until being allowed to test the market this year.

 

In sum, my stance and posts have been directed at a select group of posters who ignore the context of the situation and Kirk's role in this, and slam the FO repeatedly in a manner that is very tiresome to read. It wasn't just a black and white Kirk V. Bruce situation. There are shared responsibilities among many parties, dating back to the day he was drafted by Shanny in 2012. And that there are a ton of arguments based off of hindsight and twisting timelines to fulfill this select group of posters narrative that Bruce screwed this one up HARD. And the real kicker is when you present anything to the contrary, you are labeled an ardent FO supporter, Kirk hater, and blind homer to the Washington Redskins. All of these slanted posts with conspiracy theories about leaks and us slamming players on their way out have little to no substance behind them. They reek of frustration that has boiled over from not being a contender in quite sometime, and do not align at all with how this team has performed the last 3 seasons. They would be much more fitting for a team like the Browns who have 1 win in 2 whole seasons. And to see some, not naming any names, post about following Kirk to another team while berating our team makes me absolutely sick. I was born and raised a Redskins fan. To switch allegiances and follow a specific player out the door goes against everything I have ever known.

 

Hopefully that clears it up some

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

21 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

There is no question the FO is the bad guys here. Even if I dont like Kirk I can tell you 100% for a fact if we were a better run team this would not even be an issue. 

 

This is a good point.  If we had a FO we liked and trusted -- it's much tougher to have a polarizing debate because you trust the decision makers.  If you trusted the decision makers and a decision doesn't jive with yours -- you just roll with it and trust it, typically.  For many of us, that wasn't the case with Vinny and not the case with Bruce either.