Veryoldschool

Let's All Get Behind Alex Smith! Or Not!! (M.E.T.) NO kirk talk---that goes in ATN forum

Recommended Posts

On 6/1/2018 at 6:01 PM, skinsfan66 said:

You keep talking about the other 3rd. rd. pick , WHY?  Without giving it away we do not have a starting QB. Stop and think about what it would be like without Smith right now.  Kirk was not going to be here that's a fact. Its over, we will see how this trade works out at the end of the year. I disagree with your 3 points, first The pick will be the first comp pick and that's a 3rd rd. pick. 2nd point see above it cost to have a starter and they added another 3rd. pick.  Point 3 Smith> Fuller and a Third.  

 

Fuller + 3rd + Matt Moore > Alex Smith. I believe Smith is an upgrade at QB, I dont think Cousins is any good, but you need to add a QB complete your equation. Better QBs were out there than Matt Moore, obviously. If Moore was the QB, we add a boatload of cap space as well. 

 

 

On 6/12/2018 at 2:00 PM, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

I think that's gotta be a beat reporter just caught up in the moment.  Kirk Cousins and Alex Smith have different reputations for being risk adverse.  

 

Then again, thats how Harbaugh & Reid wanted Smith to play. 

Edited by volsmet
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/12/2018 at 1:32 PM, HTTRDynasty said:

 

 

That first pass had to travel a minimum of 60 yards, more likely 70. That would seem ...unlikely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

That first pass had to travel a minimum of 60 yards, more likely 70. That would seem ...unlikely. 

 

He may have meant the pass traveled 50 yards, not that he threw it from the 50 yard line.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

He may have meant the pass traveled 50 yards, not that he threw it from the 50 yard line.

 

Either that or we are going to have Al Jazeera taking over Redskins park. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about it, I'll double down that the Alex Smith/Kirk Cousins narrative next year will be fascinating -- Adam Schefter was just talking about it last week and he did think some reputations are on the line for the decision makers on it.

 

You got some NFL observers that are hardcore that Kirk is the better QB and this is a downgrade

You got some NFL observers that are hardcore that Alex is the better QB and this is an upgrade

Plenty are in between the two thoughts -- but the ones who come down on a side typically come down hard

You got the normal infatuation with both fan bases about the new toy -- the dating early phase is typically the most fun time

You got the Redskins going on repeat for the 34 year old QB (3rd time) -- selling this time its different

You got the Vikings selling their fan base that Keenum had to go and Kirk is an upgrade

Vikings FO has kicked butt at building their roster -- now they think they got the missing piece -- will see.  They are on the spot. 

Some of the fans/media (in the Redskins case its more the fans) think neither guy can win the big one.

Some of these fans are also flat out relieved that their QB is gone (some of the Chief fans were so amped up to see Alex go they visited our web site to let us know) and I can tell some are amped here and on twitter that Kirk is gone.

Redskins have been almost as bad as the Browns at drafting QBs, its been a hallmark of Dan's tenure -- imagine if Alex is like Eli and fades in his mid 30s and they have to go back to that well again -- and imagine concurrently Kirk excels?

Imagine it goes the other way and Alex ends up like Brady -- a guy who can play until he's 40 like its nothing?

 

I don't buy the narrative that no matter what that the Redskins have a winning narrative here. I downgrade the Redskins for getting to this point but it is what it is now.  So thinking about the cards that are laid out now and forgetting how we got here:  It can definitely go south depending on what goes down.   But if could work out, too.  I feel the same about the Vikings -- the Vikings might not have as much riding but on their end its not just about the financial comittment but also about letting Keenum go.   Letting Keenum go after taking them to the Championship game?

 

I am not pro the current FO and hate how they dealt with Kirk as many know.  :)  However, I do like Alex a lot not just as a player but as a person.  I like Kirk too as a person and I don't blame him for squat that went down.   My answer as to what happens in all of this?  I don't know.  I don't really have a strong opinion aside from this.  I think both Alex and Kirk (like just about every QB) needs a strong running game and supporting cast.  I think they are both playoffs QBs.  My gut is one isn't distinctly better than the other but I got no beef with anyone who picks one -- I'll disagree that either QB is distinctly better than the other one.   And I do think it can blow up on us because of his age -- I don't rule it out like some do. Conversely, maybe he ends up like Brady -- which would be awesome.  I don't know. 

 

Bringing this back to just Alex.  For those who are playing up the love, watch the NFL top players show tonight.  I am pretty sure he shows up in their top 20.  That's pretty cool.   My favorite narrative about Alex is at 34 he's just getting better.   It's hard for me to just accept that as a slam dunk truth -- QBs at 34 typically aren't at their peak or if are it isn't for a long run further.  But I agree that there are exceptions to this -- Brady, Brees being examples of it.  Some of it I think will be about pure luck -- a lot of what derails guys in their mid 30s centers on an injury.  The body typically doesn't recover as quick or the same way.  So hopefully we have some luck on that front.

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Having said that, watching the top 100 players program and they said Alex didn't make it when they ran through a list of QBs who didn't make the cut.  I am surprised.  Last year was his best year -- the year before he made it, he was in the 80s so I figured this year he was bound to make the cut.  

Edited by Skinsinparadise

Share this post


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

Top 100 list has always been a joke.

 

It's inconsistent to say the least.  I know players vote but which players?  Looks like we got just 1 player who made it -- Trent.  To me Kerrigan/Scherff deserved to be on it, Alex too.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The top 100 can be a joke because a players popularity plays a role.  But you can’t discount what players that actually  play against these guys think either.

And you don’t discount anything that’s remotely negative toward the Skins. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, SkinsGuy said:

I never got the impression Cousins was fully committed to being here. He seemed to keep himself separate from the team, and always had one foot out the door.

 

This is crazy talk to me when it’s framed in this way, but I get it’s all in the eye of the beholder. I also get that, as Skins fans, we’d prefer to believe in this versus the other, more disconcerting, thought. 

 

Unfortunately, I’m in that latter group of thinking. So I’m quite disconcerted. :P 

 

Namely, that the QB position is very similar to HC in that you want your guy to be “your guy”, and that you don’t want him on one year deals, making him a lame duck. In the same way it’ll make it hard for a coach to lead, it does for a QB. Those are arguably the two most important leadership positions on the team outside of the FO. 

 

This isn’t new or hindsight. We were talking about this all along. The tags were stupid and short sighted the moment the unprecedented decision was made to allow him to play on them. For more reasons than just that one, but the lame duck/leadership issue was always a significant one. And they did it twice. :/ 

 

So, yes, it is a positive that Alex is on a deal that’ll last three years, at the very least, so it makes it easy for him to lead and for everyone to rally around him. There are no questions or doubts. It’s weird how we recognize that with Alex, yet, somehow that aspect of it is omitted when talking about Kirk’s leadership or how that affected his desire to be here. There’s this weird thinking here where it’s almost as if he applied the tags to himself. :unsure:

 

I don’t believe Kirk was afforded, by the FO, the ability to NOT have “one foot out the door”. They screwed up, then kept screwing up. They are the ones who let his market get to where it was at. If they were never going to pay it, let him go to someone who will. So I don’t blame him for that. He was only asking for what his market was, as was borne out this Free Agency. No one can now say he overvalued his market, because there were teams willing to pay that price. You can disagree if he’s worth that, but it doesn’t change that reality. This is a Dan/Bruce thing all the way, either pay what the market dictates or move on if you don’t like it. Dragging it on like they did was absolutely moronic, and it’s only natural that it’d affect Kirk negatively. There is a reason you don’t see QBs get tagged often, the Skins haven’t innovated something brilliant here. 

 

Alex is cheaper because that’s his market for various reasons, age being a big one. Not because he took some pay cut to be here. He’s also getting paid handsomely and is in the top 6 of QB contracts in terms of guaranteed money right now (only two spots behind Kirk, actually). Also, Kirk has just three years of starting experience and has shown consistent growth, so his ceiling is still in question (which is of immense value in and of itself). Alex, on the other hand, has over a decade of starting experience, so his ceiling is largely a known. The good news is he has shown improvement the last couple of years, as well, so it’s possible there’s still room for growth. 

 

And to address some other things that have been said here, I think talking about percentage of cap without acknowledging the differences mentioned above is silly. So is ignoring the 3rd rounder and Fuller in that percentage. I mean, come on now, let’s not be ridiculous. At the very least, the rookie contracts of Fuller and the 3rd rounder should be included in that percentage for Alex... but the reality is it’s more when considering just how good Fuller was playing as well as how solid we’ve been at drafting in the mid rounds. 

 

We also, technically, have our QB under control for more than three years whereas the Vikings don’t. But I’m not sure that’s necessarily a win for us due to his age and the amount of money he costs after that, not to mention the dead cap involved if released ($13.5 million in 2021). That dead cap money is what aids in his “lower percentage” the first three years, so again, we shouldn’t look at it that simply. 

 

Finally, the comp pick we’ll get for Kirk next year should be included. 

 

Lot of moving parts, suffice to say, so just saying “we got Alex at less of a cap percentage” really belies basic economic principles.

 

But getting back to the main theme of this post, everyone has the narrative they want to accept. 

 

For me, it’s hard to believe Kirk just woke up one day and randomly “didn’t want to be here”. That’s cute and all, but no. He’s not a toolbag in my eyes or a phony, to me those labels are just another example of the Redskins’ FO creating yet another villain with fans desperately wanting to buy in for either obvious (innocent fanhood-based) reasons or subtle (ego-related) agendas. He was an extremely hard worker here and improved on aspects of his game every year. It’s not an accident every coach that’s been around him here chose him as their guy and almost always glowingly praised him, even after they left the building - coaches widely considered offensive geniuses. He didn’t fool all of these people, for God’s sake. 

 

This FO gave him every reason to feel like they didn’t want him long term. It’s that simple. And instead of just letting him go, they played it safe (an extremely expensive “safe”) by tagging him so that Jay wasn’t screwed the last couple years and the team had a chance to compete. 

 

As for this narrative about Jay putting a price on him Bruce and co. were just following... that’s laughable to me. By all accounts from the beat writers who’ve proven they had a handle on the situation (like Mike Jones and John Keim), Jay stood on the table for him every year up until, maybe, the last month of this season.

 

I think once they were out of the playoff hunt both men were fed up with everything and wanted out of the situation. But we’ve got to remember that Jay isn’t heavily involved in contracts, so when we say he was “standing on the table for him” it’s limited. I know it’s weird for Skins’ fans to grasp this since it’s a rarity here, but he is actually just the HC and his authority shouldn’t be conflated with Bruce’s. He’s arguably the only “normal” part of the vague organizational structure here. Jay doesn’t get what he wants ALL THE TIME. 

 

Anyway, I don’t blame either one for those feelings at the end. That is the situation they were put in, and it goes back to everything we talk about regarding how the top brass of an FO can do so much damage and limit the success of its staff. 

 

Jay had every right to want more loyalty from Kirk and to look at it like Kirk should just sacrifice whatever feelings he had towards anyone else in the building for him, while Kirk had every right not to want to get stuck with leadership that really never wanted him (while taking less than his market worth as well as swallowing his lack of belief in their ability to succeed) and sacrifice himself exclusively for Jay, who is beholden to said leadership himself. Heck, all Kirk has to say to Jay is “...dude, they gave you an extension right away with no questions and two years left on your deal...” and drop the mic. 

 

No one will want to look at it here (we’ve already seen how only negative tweets or reports are posted, while everything else is ignored), but I’m sure Kirk will be a different guy in Minnesota in terms of leading the team. He can be. There are reports indicating such, as Keim even pointed out on twitter, but I don’t care enough to sit here and post them. 

 

Interestingly, Kirk’s actually answered this question the last two offseasons bluntly and honestly. Every time he’s been asked if the one year tags make it harder to lead, he has said yes and that it does make a difference. It’s common sense, really, for any leadership position. Alex has said the same about knowing where you’re going to be long term and how empowering that is. But I’m not surprised this is ignored and I won’t be surprised if it continues to be.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 4
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one thing that gets missed on Smith is most QBs in his shoes don’t last in the NFL for long and yet here he is 11 seasons and still a starter . 

 

When I say what he has been through it is a lot, multiple OC, schemes dysfunctional team building (the Yorkes are very very bad) traded to the chiefs for a bag of nuts after the ownership chased the read option bubble QB - went through transition there in a run heavy scheme saw his replacement brought in and traded again for a bag of nuts ( 3rd round pick and a one year wonder cb is not a lot for a starting QB) but has handled the whole thing with class ...

 

There are plenty of very good QBs who would have been washed out by that entire process ... 

 

people led tend to blame Smith for not being Aaron Rodgers , and because it has taken Smith a while to get into his grove - but Rodgers has pretty been in the same scheme and with the same team his whole career ... and when Rodgers did play in any of the first few seasons he was on the bench he did not look ready at all .. 

 

so so given all that and Smiths none traditional NFL education I am not sure why you would have a hard time buying into the rhetoric that Smith is just getting better ... .i still think there will be teaching problems but I think the Skins are better now than they were at QB - it’s just been a very bad way of getting here .

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

people led tend to blame Smith for not being Aaron Rodgers , and because it has taken Smith a while to get into his grove - but Rodgers has pretty been in the same scheme and with the same team his whole career ... and when Rodgers did play in any of the first few seasons he was on the bench he did not look ready at all .. 

 

so so given all that and Smiths none traditional NFL education I am not sure why you would have a hard time buying into the rhetoric that Smith is just getting better ... .i still think there will be teaching problems but I think the Skins are better now than they were at QB - it’s just been a very bad way of getting here .

 

I hate playing devil's advocate because my comments are often then taken out of context and then I get labeled by it.  But I'll risk it.  Let me start with repeating what I've said a zillion times.  I like Alex Smith.  I think he's a good QB.  

 

The idea that a 34 year old QB who relies a lot on his legs is only getting better -- is a wild card, not a slam dunk of course he is type of comment. Even his coach referred to his age when asked about why draft someone let alone trade up in the draft to make it happen.  I get the whole Andy spin later about the cap but that's like him, he's all class. 

 

If you got cap issues you don't dump your 18 million a year QB, you dump some of their supporting cast.  That's how other teams roll.  I think we'd be condemning Alex not praising him by saying hey Reid felt that Alex was the guy who had to go to make cap room, not the other guys.  So I'd take Andy at his most honest when asked about the drill initially where he cited Alex's age -- that narrative IMO is much nicer to Alex IMO. 

 

I give some leeway to loving the new toy because when we acquire new players I like, I get overly effusive too.  I bought into the McNabb narrative and most of the new guys acquired.   For me of course Paul Richardson will be great (feel invested in the dude since I touted him before we took him in FA).  We can ignore the 2 ACL injuries.  And focus on how he was emerging last year and he's young.  You cling on to the positive narrative.

 

For Alex, I'dd add, I noticed some overlap with the Kirk critics and Alex love so yeah I can get that too from that perspective. Ditto he's cool guy.  So how can't you root for him.  You add a little off season hoopla which is common at this time of the year and it all feels great.   And I hope the narrative does turn out great.  I think at least for a season or two it will be good. 

 

But I can't help noticing how Alex's critics say almost the identical thing Kirk's critics say about him -- almost word for word.  There is an odd relief by some in both fan bases that both are gone.   The two are actually even similar people IMO -- Scot himself talked about that in an interview last year.  Alex being the more mellow of the two.  And personally I like both QBs -- as players and personalities.   

 

But both QBs are wild cards as to answering their critics.  For Kirk the narrative is he's been considered a guy who has done well without a great supporting cast -- lack of defense/running game.  The people who like him say imagine if he had a well rounded team?  Well, now he's got it.  And he's on the spot.  For Alex for his long career its he never had a 4000 yard season until last year (and he's almost always had top 10 running games) -- does he need the best deep threat in the league, one of the best RBs, and TEs to succeed at that scale -- or can he do it without all of that?  To your point, is he really just getting better and better in his mid 30s?  The answer IMO we don't know. 

 

I like both QBs but IMO neither of those answers are self evident -- for either guy.   I got my theories for how it will go down.  But that's all it is a theory.   They both have something to prove IMO for different reasons.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

And you don’t discount anything that’s remotely negative toward the Skins. 

 

I'd bet every last penny I have that if Alex Smith was on this list, particularly in the top 20, you'd be picking up your Dan and Bruce cape from the dry cleaners and flying into this thread wearing it.  Telling us about how great it is that we exchanged a top 70 or 80 ranked guy for a top 20, that's a better leader and player than the old guy and much more respected by his peers. 

 

You'd be absolutely correct in that if I read bad news about Dan or Bruce, I'd be inclined to believe it.  Because history tends to repeat itself.  The history there isn't good for either man.  However, if I read something terrible about Jay Gruden, Jim Tomsula, Bill Callahan, Ryan Kerrigan, Morgan Moses, <insert X player here>, I'd be less inclined to believe it.  Because they don't have a long history of being total F-ups.  To take it one point further, if I read that Trent Williams was rumored to have failed another drug test for marijuana - I'd be inclined to believe it.  Because the history is there.  It would kill me, as I absolutely love Trent Williams.  If I read that Jordan Reed is rumored to not be able to play in 2018 due to injury - I'd be inclined to believe it.  Because the history is there.  I'd hate it, because I love Jordan Reed as a player. 

 

For some reason, you can't separate Dan and Bruce from 'the Skins'.  I've defended both Jay and Kirk among others, both of whom were Redskins at the time to 'Skins fans' on this very site on too many occasions.  'Skins fans' that can't wait to take a dump on a player or coach without acknowledging the environment created by those guys in the suite.  Or even if they do acknowledge it, they gloss over it because they'd prefer to take out their anger on the easy targets.

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

 

The idea that a 34 year old QB who relies a lot on his legs is only getting better -- is a wild card, not a slam dunk of course he is type of comment. Even his coach referred to his age when asked about why draft someone let alone trade up in the draft to make it happen.  I get the whole Andy spin later about the cap but that's like him, he's all class. 

 

This is my biggest concern regarding Smith this upcoming season.  Fans seem to be banking on how much running and scrambling he's gonna bring to the table.  I'm wondering how much Gruden will try to protect his new QB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until we win consistently, 33% of the fan base will be stuck on the last guy, and 33% will be looking forward to the next guy.  There's not going to be any getting behind of anyone in the interim.

 

It sucks, but it is what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/16/2018 at 8:28 PM, HardcoreZorn said:

And I do think Jay was a guiding force behind the Cousins contract situation.

This, probably more than anything, is why I believe Alex Smith is on our roster. Jay has dropped nuggets here and there over the past several seasons regarding Cousin’s inabilities that leads me to believe he doesn’t possess the skill-set for Jay Gruden’s full offensive scheme. I think we’ve all heard the chuckles about Cousins and the fade pass. And, passive comments from Jay’s frustration with Cousins not letting the ball out and trusting your receivers. Dont get me wrong, KC is a very good QB and will take what the D offers within the context of his self-confidence, but I tend to believe that the coach sees Alex Smith as a better fit.

 

We might (rather, I hope) see the playbook opened up more this season. 

 

Another angle I see is what does not show up in statistics but rather simply in wins vs. losses. One can’t deny, despite all the different coaches and offensive coordinators, that Alex Smith is a winner. I’m not saying KC is not a winner, but if you were to tell me that the skins will finish 8-8 with KC as the QB, I’d say, “yeah, that sounds plausible” because this is what I have seen over the past three seasons. Conversely, if you were to tell me that the Skins would finish with 10 or 11 wins with Cousins as QB, I’d be skeptical since I’ve never seen that demonstrated. I’d be hopeful, but I’d have to see it to believe it. I think the players think the same way. I know I did when I was younger and playing sports. 

 

So, while I would be happy if Cousins was still on our team, I’m a little more hopeful that Alex Smith will give us two or possibly three more wins a season. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as "reputations being on the line" for the Cousins vs. Alex Smith thing. I think that is way over-conflating the situation for what it was.  Cousins wanted out AND the front office needed to find a way to not set the franchise in a backwards roll.  Those things happened simultaneously.  Once it was apparent that Cousins was leaving, the front office could have thrown their hands up and decided to take a chance at the draft, but they decided to bring in a solid veteran QB.

 

Me personally, I said it then and I will say it now.  I think Alex Smith is a solid QB. I don't believe he is leagues ahead of Cousins, but I do think he does some things better than Cousins and vice versa. I also don't think it was QB play (necessarily over all) that held the team back in the last few seasons.  The defense was bad for the most part, and there was a big turnover on offense last offseason, no running game etc etc etc.....

 

The roster overall got better going into 2018, whether you think Alex Smith is a difference maker or not, the roster itself definitely improved on both sides of the ball.

 

The same could be said for Cousins as far as his 2018 outlook, he is now on a team that was a game away from the Superbowl.  He is on a team with a very good defense and a running game.  It's possible we see a very different Cousins now on a team with an entirely different DNA than what he has been accustomed to.  On the flip side, he is also playing for a team that pretty much knows that better QB play likely would have got them to the super bowl.  Cousins now has the weight of needing to be "the guy" on a team that is ready to win now.  How will he respond? I think it is accurate to say that Cousins has faltered in some big game situations in the past, no?

 

In summary, I believe the Cousins vs. Alex Smith narrative is a little overblown because the two situations/teams they are on are not really comparable.  Also, the Redskins didn't "pass on Cousins" in favor of Alex Smith (well, in a way they did a few seasons ago which likely lead to his departure, that's fair).

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@thesubmittedone Summed up the Jay/Kirk/Alex scenario better than anyone.

 

I don't think for one second that Jay has any say in how much you pay the quarterback.  I believe this narrative is being pushed to feel better about the move and push the responsibility onto the more likeable figure in Jay.  I'm sure Jay does like Alex Smith as a quarterback.  I'm also sure Jay doesn't believe he'd be given the time required to develop a rookie QB without getting some wins under his belt first.  But I don't for one second see anything that leads me to believe that he was the driving force in acquiring Alex Smith and determining how much money either he or Kirk are worth.  But I can see why folks want to paint it that way and this organizational structure lends itself to that type of speculation.

Edited by BatteredFanSyndrome
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

This is crazy talk to me when it’s framed in this way, but I get it’s all in the eye of the beholder. I also get that, as Skins fans, we’d prefer to believe in this versus the other, more disconcerting, thought. 

 

Well, we are all crazy (or extreme :)).

 

For me, I just don't buy that Cousins was seemingly detached and held himself apart from the team simply because he didn't have a long term deal. He was  on tags, but these were very VERY hefty tags. He couldn't find it in himself to be more of a leader? He was certainly making enough money that he could've tried.

 

To me, I think Alex Smith will be a better leader here, and not just because he has a long-term deal. I think he has the better personality for it.

 

It reminds me of back that season when Gibbs won his second Super Bowl. The Redskins had two QBs, Doug Williams and Jay Schroeder. The players could've rallied around either man. They ended up rallying around Williams because he was a natural leader and committed himself  to the team.

 

Schroeder, meanwhile, according to players who were on that team, was aloof and detached. He kind of held himself above and away from the rest of the team (Bostic in the "America's Game" documentary referred to it as "Me, myself, and I" syndrome). This had nothing to do with money. It was just the very different personalities of these two players.

 

Will Cousins suddenly become a natural leader because he has more money in his pocket and a couple more years on his deal instead of one? I don't know.

 

But I'm more comfortable (right now) with Smith in the leadership role for Washington than I was with Cousins.

Edited by SkinsGuy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SkinsGuy said:

For me, I just don't buy that Cousins was seemingly detached and held himself apart from the team simply because he didn't have a long term deal. He was  on tags, but these were very VERY hefty tags. He couldn't find it in himself to be more of a leader? He was certainly making enough money that he could've tried.

Head coaches make a lot of money, but are still seen as lame ducks if they are on the last year of their deal.  I don't think players or coaches earn respect by the amount of their annual salary.  But it sure makes their job easier when everyone around knows said coach or player is there to stay.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.