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

[Burgold]

Maybe a dumb question, but can the Redskins trade their transition or franchise rights?

 

if they could trade the rights instead of the player that would be great for the Redskins. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

On 2/2/2018 at 2:03 PM, Butz65 said:

 

Perhaps I missed something.  How many playoff wins does Cousins have?  Ok, maybe that's not fair.  How many wins in big games (playoff dependent) did Cousins have?  I liked Cousins but don't consider him a franchise QB. There aren't that many in the league to begin with but he doesn't get close to that bucket for me - (neither does Smith by the way).  Given that three of the final four QB's in the Conference Championship games aren't franchise QB's maybe that doesn't matter in the end.  He's gone - I'm one who doubts he'll make the ultimate difference anywhere he goes.

 

If you can't see how Kirk Cousins could have a dramatic effect on teams starting Trevor Semien or Blaine Gabbert I seriously have to question your football knowledge.  

[carex]

6 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Probably so.  If so, McCartney calls their bluff and nothing happens.  Don't get me wrong, I'd love for them to pull it off.   But as Mike Lombardi said from working with Bruce he likes to think he's smarter than the agents and plays games with them but the agents aren't fooled. So I presume since McCartney has played Allen like a fiddle.  It will extend to this, too.

 

Meanwhile I am reading that SF is nearing a deal for Jimmy G. and they didn't want to go the franchise tag route.  As Joel Corry said recently the Redskins have set a template for the rest of the league as for how not to handle QB negotiations.  Maybe that's Bruce's ticket to the hall of fame -- he's saved a lot of franchises future heartache in negotiations. No sarcasm here but I truly think the Kirk negotiation will go down as clinic case in point as to what not to do with contracts if there is such a think as classes in how to run a team.    

 

I think the only thing that will change is teams will be less willing to wait till they're sure about someone.  Not being positive someone is your guy will be same as deciding he isn't

[CousinsCowgirl84]

3 minutes ago, Burgold said:

Maybe a dumb question, but can the Redskins trade their transition or franchise rights. 

 

 

Theyed have to tag him then trade him, but everyone says that won’t happen, although it’s outside of my ability to grasp why it wouldn’t work IF another team was interested (though, that seems infathomable for any team but the browns, and even with the browns very unlikely).

[Wildbunny]

9 hours ago, TK said:

 

HUGE risk because if no one bites by March 14, 4pm the Cap is tied up with his hit & you're basically crippled until you can offload his Cap hit.

Well they'll be able to cut Smith then.

 

6 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

Not directed at you - actually thanks for posting this. 

 

There is only one thing I can think of dumber and more self destructive tan just letting Kirk walk if you do not get a deal by the March 14th deadline - that's tag him without a deal in place and Kirk on board. I get this is a business. But there is smart business and there is petty vindictiveness. 

 

Tagging him to try and force a trade is just straight up petty and vindictive. 

 

For once just move on!!  Just let it be over!! So tired of this crap. The one true silver lining in the Smith trade (which again I do not hate considering the ridiculous circumstances the FO put themselves in.) was knowing the saga would come to an end.  

Somehow yes, I believe Bruce wants to get something out of Kirk.

The trade for Smith didn't go well within fans, especially after releasing Fuller, so he's more than anything on the hot seat and might want to try something desperate to look like he wasn't that dumb.

 

But I Kirk said it, if they tag , he'll sign, and he would be stupid to not sign it. He'll follow his agent's strategy and that's it. (Wouldn't it be fun if somehow Scott was passing info about what to do, or not to do to his buddy as well?).

 

Then it would be glorious for Kirk to sign the tag, the need having no trade partners for Kirk, and them being forced to back off from the Smith trade as it isn't official yet. Or try to trade Smith for peanuts...

 

Feel like we're gonna win the offseason by a wide margin this year again. The little man will get angry soon...

[CousinsCowgirl84]

Does the offer count against the cap if the player doesn’t sign?  I’m pretty sure the skins would only offer the tag if they had a for-sure trading partner lined up.

[Burgold]

Just now, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Does the offer count against the cap if the player doesn’t sign? 

I think so. At least the team needs to reserve that amount of cap. 

[bobandweave]

Lots of teams could absorb his tag number who need QBs as is.

 

A LTD is needed for some teams like the Broncos but not if your the Browns, Jets, or Jaguars. They can easily take a one year rental out of Kirk and kick the tires of if they want to give the guy 130 million bucks or not at 34.5. 

 

Are we discrediting Kirk who’s played on one year deals the past few seasons the desire to possibly play on another one year deal if it means he’s getting paid that much? Why would Kirk demand a LTD from anyone? Why not just take the money play one year like he has for the past few years and revisit next season? Clearly that plans been working out well for him 

 

This things got some legs if Adam Schefter is writing about it the day of the Super Bowl

 

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22315705/washington-redskins-consider-placing-franchise-tag-kirk-cousins

[CousinsCowgirl84]

3 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I think so. At least the team needs to reserve that amount of cap. 

 

http://www.askthecommish.com/SalaryCap/Faq.asp

 

just found the answer. Yes it counts. I doubt kirk would sign the tag in this case. He surely can get more than 34mil gtd...

[bradboyd80]

The only way I see a tag/trade actually going down is if Cousins really does want to win and a team is desperate enough to not want him on the market in open bidding. Those teams with a good chance of being in the playoffs next year just might want to work it out with us.  Allow Cousins to work out a LTD with a prospective new team (Broncos/Jax/Vikes).  Then tag/trade him for whatever we can get (can't imagine a 1st would be out of the question at that point).  Its could be a win for all parties.  But it hinges on Kirk's interest in said team.  If BA wants to control where he goes, the whole idea goes into the ****ter.

[carex]

11 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

 

Theyed have to tag him then trade him, but everyone says that won’t happen, although it’s outside of my ability to grasp why it wouldn’t work IF another team was interested (though, that seems infathomable for any team but the browns, and even with the browns very unlikely).

 

tag and trade means no bidding war, and the other team might think they can re-sign him easier than the Skins.  Besides Kirk has said he'll play on the tag for the Skins, who it's generally assumed he's pissed at, not for other teams.

 

And you know, one of my problems with the people complaining about the Skins: the Skins are wrong for allowing him to get this close to the open market, no one else would let their potential franchise QB reach the open market, and Kirk is okay for being mad that the Skins won't let him test the open market.

 

Why?  Why should Kirk expect the Skins to allow him to do something that no team in the league would allow thier potential franchise QB to do?  And Kirk has in fact admitted he's refused to negotiate because he wants to test the market.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

How would the tag help cousins?

 

 

 

I think cousins doesn’t like bruce, on a personal level. I think he gave up on the team after the saints game this year.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

2 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

This things got some legs if Adam Schefter is writing about it the day of the Super Bowl

 

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22315705/washington-redskins-consider-placing-franchise-tag-kirk-cousins

Did you read the article?  He spells out how slim the chances are it gets done.  The only thing that has legs is the fact that the Redskins are considering doing it, not that anyone would actually play along.

[Skinsinparadise]

30 minutes ago, carex said:

 

I think the only thing that will change is teams will be less willing to wait till they're sure about someone.  Not being positive someone is your guy will be same as deciding he isn't

 

I think the franchise tag will be questioned in this context.  Kirk himself said in his interviews this week that was the game changer, the tag and implied it led to this point.  He referred to it in another interview, too.  Beat reporters have said a key impasse in the negotiation was Kirk's agent finds the tag as a relevant anchor point in the negotiations and Bruce doesn't. 

 

I was debating someone on the contract, forgot whom, and they sent me an article about how difficult it was to negotiate a LTC after the tag.  They thought it backed Bruce's approach.  But when I got through that article.  My takeaway was the thesis of that article was the tag isn't the way to go as to negotiating a LTC.   And if you use the tag, then the first year should be the same figure of the tag in a LTC and the next year that figure should raise 20%.   That wasn't even close to what the Redskins offered. 

 

So the only defense there of Bruce was the idea that since Kirk was tagged -- it made sense that the contract was uphill from that point.  The thing is tagging Kirk was a decision they made, they weren't forced into it.

 

All of this makes Scot look a little better as to the Kirk contract.  The rumor was in 2016 was he didn't want to tag Kirk.  Either work out a LTC or trade him.  They could have likely got something for Kirk, then.  Now, I'd put money that they get nothing for him or at best a 3rd round comp in 2019 which is close enough to nothing. 

12 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Did you read the article?  He spells out how slim the chances are it gets done.  The only thing that has legs is the fact that the Redskins are considering doing it, not that anyone would actually play along.

 

John Keim who I've felt all along based on things he's said has the best pipeline to Kirk's agent.  I've given multiple examples of why in the past.  Anyway on twitter, Keim is vehement on its not going to happen, the trade idea is a fantasy according to him.  I trust him on this more than anyone because I am gathering he likely got it from Kirk's agent directly.  And to pull this off you need Kirk's agent's cooperation.  

 

 

Kevin Sheehan‏ @kevins980 1m1 minute ago

More

The whole thing has much more of a chance to turn ugly for the team than for Cousins. $34M in cap space could be tied up through free agency period-bad. He could decide to sign it, not commit to LTD w/trade partner & take the money here next year ($51M in 2 QBs)...also bad.

[bobandweave]

18 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Did you read the article?  He spells out how slim the chances are it gets done.  The only thing that has legs is the fact that the Redskins are considering doing it, not that anyone would actually play along.

 

Yes why else would I post it? Just because you think no team would go for it doesn’t mean no team would go for it. 

 

You have forgotten the past two seasons of this stupid Kirk Cousins drama. The Redskins weren’t sure about paying Kirk big money long term so they paid him in one year increments. 

 

How did Kirk respond? Very very well to getting paid.

 

His production on the field was lacking, and his last game playing for the Redskins was so bad you can’t argue against it being his worst professional day playing football but no matter what he was all about getting that money.

 

Even this week he says if the Redskins offer to tag him he’s signing it.

 

Now consider this. Say you are the Browns and you know your going to draft a QB in the first round. Even sitting on a hundred million in cap space why are you going out there to sign Kirk to a LTD? Your not. That would be stupid. A LTD doesn’t work for the Browns. 

 

However if the Browns just want to rent a QB for a season so that the new draft pick doesn’t get the Kizer treatment and start right away then Kirk would do fine for that. And shifting 34.5 million of cap space out a year from now isn’t a bad thing to do

 

And that’s the point.

 

Pretending that every team that may want Kirk has to have him long term is wrong.

 

There may be teams that do not want Kirk long term but could want him for just a season. Just like many didn’t want Alex Smith long term.

 

And if the Redskins can tag Kirk knowing he’d sign it and then ship him to the Browns without a LTD what makes you certain he would be against that?

 

Kirk has never been against signing a one year contract before, why start caring about that now? You don’t think 34 million dollars to play a season for the Browns would entice Kirk with a guarantee that he’s hitting free agency again the next year?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

Mike Jones‏Verified account @ByMikeJones 27m27 minutes ago

More

Mike Jones Retweeted Grant Paulsen

Confirmed there have indeed been internal discussions on this. It would lead to a sticky and complicated situation, which is typical for the Redskins.

Mike Jones added,

 

[carex]

8 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I think the franchise tag will be questioned in this context.  Kirk himself said in his interviews this week that was the game changer, the tag and implied it led to this point.  He referred to it in another interview, too.  Beat reporters have said a key impasse in the negotiation was Kirk's agent finds the tag as a relevant anchor point in the negotiations and Bruce doesn't. 

 

I was debating someone on the contract, forgot whom, and they sent me an article about how difficult it was to negotiate a LTC after the tag.  They thought it backed Bruce's approach.  But when I got through that article.  My takeaway was the thesis of that article was the tag isn't the way to go as to negotiating a LTC.   And if you use the tag, then the first year should be the same figure of the tag in a LTC and the next year that figure should raise 20%.   That wasn't even close to what the Redskins offered. 

 

So the only defense there of Bruce was the idea that since Kirk was tagged -- it made sense that the contract was uphill from that point.  The thing is tagging Kirk was a decision they made, they weren't forced into it.

 

All of this makes Scot look a little better as to the Kirk contract.  The rumor was in 2016 was he didn't want to tag Kirk.  Either work out a LTC or trade him.  They could have likely got something for Kirk, then.  Now, I'd put money that they get nothing for him or at best a 3rd round comp in 2019 which is close enough to nothing. 

 

 

someone needs to go back and find out how many franchise players who signed long term deals had their first year exactly equal to the franchise tender. I think it's pretty rare.  Which, if true would be another way Kirk and his agent expect to be treated different from everyone else

[Skinsinparadise]

14 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

However if I’m the Browns and I just want to rent a QB for a season so that the new draft pick doesn’t get the Kizer treatment and start right away then Kirk would do fine for that. 

 

And that’s the point.

 

Pretending that every team that may want Kirk has to have him long term is wrong. There may be teams that do not want Kirk long term but just for a season. Just like many didn’t want Alex Smith long term. And if they can tag Kirk knowing he’d sign it and then ship him to the Browns without a LTD what makes you certain he would be against that? He’s never been against signing a one year contract before, why start caring about that now?

 

 

Thing is I don't disagree with the premise of your point.  It gets a team like the Browns involved and puts them in a position that they might not have been otherwise as to being a suitor.  But that same unattractive scenario presents itself to Kirk and his agent.  And they have the leverage to dilly dally and make the Redskins sit out the most important part of FA -- the initial rush at the best guys.

 

Your point is hey Kirk would take the 34 million and play for the Browns and enjoy it.  I am not so sure that's true.  He's on the brink of picking his spots. 

 

I was probably the most vocal get compensation for Kirk guy weeks ago.  But once they traded for Alex Smith, i lost out on any hope because the tag lost its leverage.   Will see.  My gut is McCartney will have the last laugh at Bruce's expense again. 

8 minutes ago, carex said:

 

someone needs to go back and find out how many franchise players who signed long term deals had their first year exactly equal to the franchise tender. I think it's pretty rare.  Which, if true would be another way Kirk and his agent expect to be treated different from everyone else

 

You've consistently had the FO's back, I'll give you that.  To each their own.   I think they fouled it up.  I had Bruce's back until July of 2017, then he lost me.  

 

According to Craig Hoffman, 106.7, Grant Paulsen, has been digging hard into this story, he's coming on the radio at 10 am.

[spjunkies]

12 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Mike Jones‏Verified account @ByMikeJones 27m27 minutes ago

More

Mike Jones Retweeted Grant Paulsen

Confirmed there have indeed been internal discussions on this. It would lead to a sticky and complicated situation, which is typical for the Redskins.

Mike Jones added,

 

 

Jones, Paulsen and every other reporter with a personal vendetta against the team are looking for more reasons to be critical. Of course they had internal communication about their options, but the chances of them making this move are 0.5%.

[carex]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Thing is I don't agree with the premise if your point.  It gets a team like the Browns involved and puts them in a position that they might not have been otherwise as to being a suitor.  But that same unattractive scenario presents itself to Kirk and his agent.  And they have the leverage to dilly dally and make the Redskins sit out the most important part of FA -- the initial rush at the best guys.

 

Your point is hey Kirk would take the 34 million and play for the Browns and enjoy it.  I am not so sure that's true.  He's on the brink of picking his spots. 

 

I was probably the most vocal get compensation for Kirk guy weeks ago.  But once they traded for Alex Smith, i lost out on any hope because the tag lost its leverage.   Will see.  My gut is McCartney will have the last laugh at Bruce's expense again. 

 

You've consistently had the FO's back, I'll give you that.  To each their own. 

 

I don't think as many spots will want him as he thinks.  I think the Vikings would take Keenum and/or Bridgewater for significantly less.  I also think the idea of a one year rental from a team like the Browns is a ridiculous idea, since it would just lower their draft pick nexxt year.  If they don't want to throw their pick to the wolves they still have Kizer on for three more years

 

If you think the front office is incompetent then you may as well not be here. I also don't like people who are already getting special treatment to demand more special treatment.  I don't like the Skins history on handing out huge contracts, I think a significant amount of people here's kneejerk reactions to Redskins moves would mean they would be complaining just as loudly if the Skins had made hm the highest paid player in league history.  And there are things I dislike about Kirk, I'll admit

[bobandweave]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Thing is I don't agree with the premise if your point.  It gets a team like the Browns involved and puts them in a position that they might not have been otherwise as to being a suitor.  But that same unattractive scenario presents itself to Kirk and his agent.  And they have the leverage to dilly dally and make the Redskins sit out the most important part of FA -- the initial rush at the best guys.

 

Your point is hey Kirk would take the 34 million and play for the Browns and enjoy it.  I am not so sure that's true.  He's on the brink of picking his spots. 

 

Help me to understand this.

 

If the Redskins strike a deal with say the Jaguars to slap the franchise tag on Kirk and then ship him on the tag to Jacksonville then 

 

1. Why is a LTD important at all to this?I

 

2. Why would the agent have any say in where Kirk goes as long as he signed the franchise tag? The Redskins tagged Kirk, he’s theirs to do whatever they want with. If the team wanted to make it so that he isn’t playing next season they can definitely do that

 

what I don’t get is why Kirk has to be on board with any of this? Tell Kirk whatever you want him to think (they are keeping him and dealing Alex Smith ) then Slap the tag on him and ship him elsewhere and let that new team deal with the fallout

 

 

 

[carex]

3 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Help me to understand this.

 

If the Redskins strike a deal with say the Jaguars to slap the franchise tag on Kirk and then ship him on the tag to Jacksonville then 

 

1. Why is a LTD important at all to this?I

 

2. Why would the agent have any say in where Kirk goes as long as he signed the franchise tag? The Redskins tagged Kirk, he’s theirs to do whatever they want with. If the team wanted to make it so that he isn’t playing next season they can definitely do that

 

what I don’t get is why Kirk has to be on board with any of this? Tell Kirk whatever you want him to think (they are keeping him and dealing Alex Smith ) then Slap the tag on him and ship him elsewhere and let that new team deal with the fallout

 

 

 

 

the idea is that other teams would have to be stupid to make the deal, even if they can do it.  Redskins bashers on here think the Redskins are the only stupid team in the league

[bobandweave]

Just now, carex said:

 

the idea is that other teams would have to be stupid to make the deal, even if they can do it.  Redskins bashers on here think the Redskins are the only stupid team in the league

 

You said the Browns idea would be stupid because it only hurts where they draft the next season.

 

How has it worked out for the Browns drafting at 1 the past few years? Not good at all. So why is a LTD with a team who is going to take a QB with the first overall pick important to the Browns? It isn’t. 

 

The reason they dont let Kizer get another chance is he sucks. Nothing good comes from that. Kirk on a one year deal means they will win some games with him. And for a zero win team turning that around would be important.

 

Some teams out there are stupid. I never said the Browns were stupid. I said that Kirk on a one year deal for them makes sense

[rumplestilskin]

At this point we are just leaking this to make Cousins squirm. If he thinks there is a possibility of heading to Cleveland he may be amiable to explore the Denver or NY route via the Skins.

[bh32]

This team just can't stop embarrassing themselves with stupid decisions...the time to trade Cousins was last year if they knew no LTD could be worked out..