Serious Question: Do you regret letting Cousins go?

[Skinsinparadise]

 

Bruce IMO doesn't deserve an escape hatch on this:

 

As for Scot, if we are following reports.  He wasn't ready to commit in 2016.  In early 2017 he didn't want to tag Kirk and supposedly wanted to trade him then.  And in an interview after he left he said at that point he would look to find a way to keep Kirk versus let him go.  When I had time, I'll look for it.  I am 100% sure of it, I recall posting the article.

 

Even Jay's brother mocked the Redskins for only getting a 3rd round comp pick for Kirk.

 

If you pull the Keim podcast before the Vikings game he said what he heard was that people in that building wanted to trade Kirk because they didn't see it working out but Bruce disagreed, he thought they can make it happen.

 

I admit there was one competing story on the same subject where Finlay said in the summer of 2017 that he was told that their bottom line isn't getting trade value for Kirk but winning that season. 

 

Paulsen who was close with Kirk doubled down as recently as yesterday that Bruce was a large reason why Kirk ultimately wanted out.  Keim and others elaborated on the same point. 

 

None of this adds up to good things.    Bruce IMO deserves a big fat F for how it was handled.  Dan, too. 

 

 

[ananoman]

4 hours ago, SkinsFanMania said:

don't change the rules.  You had me pick one and he was gone anyways.  They drafted Phillip Rivers 2 years prior to letting him go.  The injury didn't play any part.    Just as you stated

 

Carson Palmer did well and so did Kurt Warner.   There are others as well.  Howabout Jim Plunkett.  Drafted 1st overall by the Pats.  Won 2 super bowls with the Raiders.  Do you want me to go on or is that enough for you.

 

Kurt Warner- another qb who was a victim of cognitive bias.  Going from an undrafted grocery stockboy to NFL and Super Bowl MVP, with back to back Super Bowl appearances,  he was unceremoniously released by the Rams 2 seasons later after injury-  I'm pretty sure they figured him for a fluke, a flash in the pan.

 

Took him a while, but he resurrected his career with the Arizona Cardinals and  now his bust sits in the NFL Hall of Fame.

 

Some people just never shake their initial impression of a person, and it ends up coloring their perception of him no matter what he does.

[Mania]

20 minutes ago, ananoman said:

 

Kurt Warner- another qb who was a victim of cognitive bias.  Going from an undrafted grocery stockboy to NFL and Super Bowl MVP, with back to back Super Bowl appearances,  he was unceremoniously released by the Rams 2 seasons later after injury-  I'm pretty sure they figured him for a fluke, a flash in the pan.

 

Took him a wile, but he resurrected his career with the Arizona Cardinals and  now his bust sits in the NFL Hall of Fame.

 

Some people just never shake their initial impression of a person, and it ends up coloring their perception of him no matter what he does.

Anyway, he never should have been released and that was my point.   I remember this and it wasn't because they thought he was a flash in the pan, not at all.  He was replaced for Marc Bulger at the time and it was early in the season.   It had nothing to do with him being a flash in the pan.  

[SlinginSammy HOF '63]

Simply put, DanBruce pushed out the best QB this franchise had in decades. I believe better than Ryp and Joe T. Rypien had an amazing O-line and three receivers that would've been the #1 guy on most other teams. Joe had an awesome line, a bruiser runner, and talent around him. It's like this franchise just loathes itself. Best QB in decades and you do everything to make him not want to be here.

[Daniel.redskins]

I miss Cousins.  He drove me crazy at times, but it was nice having a competent QB.  We were winning games and always in the playoff picture.  Let's not forget how bad the defense was when he was here.  We consistently lost games 35 to 28.  Now we can't score any points.  We have a young QB who will take years to get on Cousins' level when it comes to route anticipation and reading complex defenses.  If at all.  Haskins has a much stronger arm and a better personality, but struggles in ways that Cousins never did.  But what's done is done and we need to support who we have.  

[PF Chang]

51 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

Even Jay's brother mocked the Redskins for only getting a 3rd round comp pick for Kirk.

 

 

This is what bothers me most about the FO. We consistently fail to return value on our assets, and our big mistakes are so bad that they're almost beyond comparison. 

 

Every GM is going to have bad draft picks, or make trades that don't work out. I can live with that. I can't accept getting a 3rd round pick for a player who was valuable enough to sign an $84 million fully guaranteed contract in a league where Sam Bradford nets a 1st rounder. Can't accept the way we basically looked a gift horse in the mouth with the Trent situation and failed to get value for an aging star. A rebuilding team should have been considering trading Trent even if he didn't want a trade! 

 

 

[4Redskins]

I don't really miss him. He may have kept us out of the gutter (like 1-9), but he was never going to elevate the team to a championship level. Not worth the money to stay a 7-9 to 9-7 team. I thought we were better off with Alex Smith...that didn't work out, of course, but you can never predict injuries like that. I wish Cousins luck with the Vikings, but I'm not shedding any tears because he's gone (there are too many other things with the Redskins worth crying over).

[wit33]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

First let me say among the Kirk critics you are one of the more open minded ones.   I killed Daniel Jones on the draft thread in the off season and to me he looks better than I thought he would.  If I kept doubling down on my opinion on it then I'd look stubborn for the sake of being stubborn.  I try to avoid doing that.   We aren't football professionals and its not an easy sport to predict. 

 

It was never just about Kirk the QB for me— the overall market NFL teams were paying average to above guys was crazy (which is beginning to correct itself a bit). I dont like average to above guys taking up more than 8% (Is even prefer a rookie deal or paying 3-5% to a vet) of the cap or so. Sure, I own not being a fan of Kirk the dude, but recognize he was a huge contributor to the team being average during his reign and as you know, I valued being in the playoff hunt those years. 
 

Quote

I know in spite of all that you genuinely think they handled the negotiation fine, and on that I'll just continue to agree to disagree. 😀
 

This is only based off that I didn’t believe a franchise was willing to trade a first for Kirk, especially when it was known Kirk wanted to become a free agent and control his future. 
 

My thoughts:
 

Kirk starting one year and attempting to get playoffs and 3rd comp pick. No one awards value for having Kirk play QB for 16 games— strange. Curious, what draft pick would you give to have Kirk for one year? 

 

versus...

 

Receiving a 2nd or 3rd round pick and no QB for 2017 season

 

Not saying it’s a right or wrong, but it’s not crazy as some make it out to be. All bets are off if a 1st round pick was made available. 

 

Quote

 

I do think the Kirk drill was unique in that he was a homegrown QB who put up big numbers and was entering a prime age for QBs   As for your examples, you made me work, I had to look some of them up its been awhile since I thought about some of those QBs. 😀  And doing it really brought home for me how unique Kirk's situation was.  I understand your point is young-old, previous success doesn't matter.  But from my point of view, i was curious about how unique it was for QBs to leave at Kirk's age after a similar run.  So I look at it from that context.
 

 

No argument from me that Kirk’s situation was supremely unique. I’d challenge you to find 3 guys who became legit at the QB spot during the 4th and final year of their rookie deal. 

 

Not entirely similar, but all those guys experienced a great season and playoff run after being thrown aside by their previous franchise. Similar to what Kirk is experiencing this year that will hopefully lead to a playoff appearance for him and his staunch supporters:). 

 

[Mania]

16 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

It was never just about Kirk the QB for me— the overall market NFL teams were paying average to above guys was crazy (which is beginning to correct itself a bit). I dont like average to above guys taking up more than 8% (Is even prefer a rookie deal or paying 3-5% to a vet) of the cap or so. Sure, I own not being a fan of Kirk the dude, but recognize he was a huge contributor to the team being average during his reign and as you know, I valued being in the playoff hunt those years. 
 

This is only based off that I didn’t believe a franchise was willing to trade a first for Kirk, especially when it was known Kirk wanted to become a free agent and control his future. 
 

My thoughts:
 

Kirk starting one year and attempting to get playoffs and 3rd comp pick. No one awards value for having Kirk play QB for 16 games— strange. Curious, what draft pick would you give to have Kirk for one year? 

 

versus...

 

Receiving a 2nd or 3rd round pick and no QB for 2017 season

 

Not saying it’s a right or wrong, but it’s not crazy as some make it out to be. All bets are off if a 1st round pick was made available. 

 

 

No argument from me that Kirk’s situation was supremely unique. I’d challenge you to find 3 guys who became legit at the QB spot during the 4th and final year of their rookie deal. 

 

Not entirely similar, but all those guys experienced a great season and playoff run after being thrown aside by their previous franchise. Similar to what Kirk is experiencing this year that will hopefully lead to a playoff appearance for him and his staunch supporters:). 

 

 

Aaron Rodgers was in his fourth season before he started starting he was extremely good that year.  There are a lot of QBs, because QBs used to sit before they started.  I didn't even have to think about it before Arod came to mind.  If I wanted to look, I'd find a lot of QBs that came productive in their 4th yr of the rookie contract.  

[wit33]

9 minutes ago, SkinsFanMania said:

 

Aaron Rodgers was in his fourth season before he started starting he was extremely good that year.  There are a lot of QBs, because QBs used to sit before they started.  I didn't even have to think about it before Arod came to mind.  If I wanted to look, I'd find a lot of QBs that came productive in their 4th yr of the rookie contract.  

Was he under control of GB for 4 or 5 years? As he was a 1st round pick. 

[ClaytoAli]

 

[Mania]

14 minutes ago, wit33 said:

Was he under control of GB for 4 or 5 years? As he was a 1st round pick. 

not sure as it was before the new CBA.  Not sure how long his original contract was, but it was the original one.  It was probably a 5 year deal and there were no 5th year options back then.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

Sure, I own not being a fan of Kirk the dude, but recognize he was a huge contributor to the team being average during his reign and as you know, I valued being in the playoff hunt those years. 

 

 

My complement is based on for some (not all) I can tell its unbearable for Kirk to play well because they vested so much in trashing him and or saying good riddance at the time.   You on the other hand seem to be able to roll with events as they unfold including your opinion on Kirk.  You aren't a record player with the needle stuck on the same groove.  IMHO that's a good quality.  And I wish the FO was like that because I get the impression otherwise. 

 

My take on that is I got no problem with anyone getting it wrong on a player.  We all do.  My posts on Doctson, RG3 and Richardson in retrospect are embarrassing.  I think we all got stuff like that when we stick our neck out.  Who cares what we get right or not?  I have nailed some really good predictions and blown some, too.  It evens out for everyone.    Same should apply IMO for Kirk.  😀

 

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

This is only based off that I didn’t believe a franchise was willing to trade a first for Kirk, especially when it was known Kirk wanted to become a free agent and control his future. 
 

 

Sheehan (who is tight with the Shannys) said that SF was willing to trade a first early in 2017.  Changed later on but that they had a window.  But no way to know for sure.

 

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

No argument from me that Kirk’s situation was supremely unique. I’d challenge you to find 3 guys who became legit at the QB spot during the 4th and final year of their rookie deal. 

 

Not entirely similar, but all those guys experienced a great season and playoff run after being thrown aside by their previous franchise. Similar to what Kirk is experiencing this year that will hopefully lead to a playoff appearance for him and his staunch supporters:). 

 

 

 

Find me a bunch of people saying that Bruce played it right.   That's the reason why even Jay's brother could goof on it because the joke didn't need to be explained. 

 

 Scot wasn't baffled by this.  He wasn't ready to pull the trigger in 2016.   That made sense.  But he didn't seem like a lost puppy after that.  Based on his own words in 2017 once the tag happened he said you got to keep him.  According to Cole who was tight with Scot, Scot wanted to trade Kirk in early 2017.

 

Keim in a recent podcast albeit he didn't mention Scot specifically said he heard there were people in that building wanted to trade Kirk and Bruce opposed them.

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2697293-insider-buzz-gm-scot-mccloughan-was-fired-for-wanting-to-trade-kirk-cousins

The real issue is that McCloughan clashed over football decisions with team president Bruce Allen and coach Jay Gruden,” reported Cole, a longtime NFL insider. “McCloughan had planned to trade Kirk Cousins this offseason, pursue a veteran and draft another quarterback. However, Allen and Gruden wanted none of that plan.”

 

The obvious trading partner McCloughan might have contacted is the 49ers, considering they just hired Cousins’ old offensive coordinator, Kyle Shanahan, to be their head coach.

A Sporting News report sourced someone close to Cousins in relaying that the quarterback said, “I’m going to be a 49er in 2017 or 2018.”

Time will tell if Cousins is San Francisco-bound, but it seems McCloughan’s intention to deal Cousins got him fired

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/ex-redskins-gm-scot-mccloughan-explains-what-hed-do-with-kirk-cousins/

Of all the options, letting him walk in March, really, is not an option. Right? 

"You can't do that, you can't do that," said McCloughan, who is consulting and scouting for a number of NFL teams ahead of the 2018 draft. "You've already put your cards out there two years, back to back with the money you've paid him. And he's a really good teammate and a really good leader -- all of that stuff.

[wit33]

@Skinsinparadise

 

Kirk is having a great statistical year and on pace for his first 10 win season, but still feel same way about him as a QB. I believe he can be a top 10 or top 20 QB, depending on the team around him— Not an indictment, so he’s not elite, who cares. I just don’t like the NFL model of paying non elite guys elite money (an opinion). I believe most have come from both sides to meet in the middle, Kirk is a good QB, not elite... not average.

Let’s join hands and rejoice, the Kirk debate is over now  Hes good, but not elite  

 

If a deal was available for a first round pick, then I jump all the way on your side that Bruce and company botched it— I just don’t believe that to be the case. 
 

Clowney’s situation was a good comparable to Cousins situation and the Texans received a 3rd and two throw in players. This was because he is due a big money contract and wants free agency (the Seahawks had to agree to not use a franchise tag before deal was made). 

[Skinsinparadise]

54 minutes ago, wit33 said:

@Skinsinparadise

 

 Not an indictment, so he’s not elite, who cares. I just don’t like the NFL model of paying non elite guys elite money (an opinion). I believe most have come from both sides to meet in the middle, Kirk is a good QB, not elite... not average.

 

With Kirk I've ranged in my mind and posts from good to great.  The type of season he's having thus far on my spectrum doesn't pull him to the lower end of that spectrum but the higher part of it.  I disagree that its purely a function of his supporting cast as if regardless of his rise or fall -- he's the same guy.  That is, if I understand your point and maybe I don't?   

 

I think he's stepped up his game at least thus far.  I always wondered if he could.  I don't think he's playing the same as he always did and the difference is simply Diggs is better than Garcon is, etc.  So we don't fully agree if that's your point.  But I perfectly get those who say let's see if he keeps up this pace.  It's plausible to me that he might not so I want to see the book finished on the season before declaring anything but if he finishes it at this pace, then wow, there is a reason why he's mentioned in the MVP talk, its an elite QB type season let alone just great.  But will see. 

 

I've been on record saying Dak is a game manager type and not deserving of talk that he's great.  He too is playing great.  I can't double down and just ignore it to keep hold of my opinion.  If he emerges and continues to become a better QB then yeah I can be stuck on an old outdated opinion.  And like Kirk, I want to see the season unfold first for Dak.  But if he keeps on that pace, I got an open mind that he is emerging as a better QB.  Kirk and Dak wouldn't be the first QBs in NFL history to improve at a stage of their career. 

 

54 minutes ago, wit33 said:

Let’s join hands and rejoice, the Kirk debate is over now  Hes good, but not elite  

 

He might be great at worse he's good.  And yeah if you agree with that, then I'll merge hands.😀   If your verdict is nothing you see this season convinced you that he's more than just a good QB then we disagree.

 

54 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Clowney’s situation was a good comparable to Cousins situation and the Texans received a 3rd and two throw in players. This was because he is due a big money contract and wants free agency (the Seahawks had to agree to not use a franchise tag before deal was made). 

 

Clowney isn't a QB.  But I'll stop arguing this point with you because I gather short of a team coming out in retrospect saying they offered a first, which obviously will never happen -- you won't believe anyone whether its Sheehan or whomever that said that's what they heard. 

[Veryoldschool]

3 hours ago, Daniel.redskins said:

Haskins has a much stronger arm and a better personality, but struggles in ways that Cousins never did.  But what's done is done and we need to support who we have.  

 

Better personality than Cousins?  I've never met either of these young men but Kirk's public persona is very impressive, more articulate and affable than all but a few politicians.  As for Haskins, his public persona seems raw and undeveloped like his game.  Not a knock on him, he's a young man finding himself.  Another thing about Cousins he was forced to play the part of an understudy until 2016 when they finally cut Griffin loose.

[zCommander]

12 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

.... Another thing about Cousins he was forced to play the part of an understudy until 2016 when they finally cut Griffin loose.

 

Yup you are right. Kirk should have started and RG3 should have been forced to be the understudy instead. 

[wit33]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

With Kirk I've ranged in my mind and posts from good to great.  The type of season he's having thus far on my spectrum doesn't pull him to the lower end of that spectrum but the higher part of it.  I disagree that its purely a function of his supporting cast as if regardless of his rise or fall -- he's the same guy.  That is, if I understand your point and maybe I don't?   

 

I don’t think it’s purely a function of his supporting cast, I believe Kirk has established a good floor and won’t ignore that fact. For Kirk, it just hasn’t translated into double digit win seasons or even 1 spectacular season, you know? He’s always middling in average to great, as does his teams. Last year was a huge indictment on his resume and has many non believers in Minnesota, it’s not just here any longer. Maybe this is the year he delivers on a special year and his stock turns to bullish stock breaking his ceiling to date. 

 

Quote

 

I think he's stepped up his game at least thus far.  I always wondered if he could.  I don't think he's playing the same as he always did and the difference is simply Diggs is better than Garcon is, etc.  So we don't fully agree if that's your point.  But I perfectly get those who say let's see if he keeps up this pace.  It's plausible to me that he might not so I want to see the book finished on the season before declaring anything but if he finishes it at this pace, then wow, there is a reason why he's mentioned in the MVP talk, its an elite QB type season let alone just great.  But will see. 
 

 

To be honest, I’ve not watched a full Kirk game since he left, so I’ve lost any feel for the intricacies and nuances of his game that I felt I had when watching very snap here with the Skins. Mostly stat watching, highlights and the occasional quarter or half when on prime time. Again, without a detailed understanding, I’ve seen terrible games and now his recent run of tearing up the league. In my mind, that confirms what I’ve seen from him here, but I could totally be off on that. Generally, time will tell though, even if watching from afar. 
 

Quote

 

I've been on record saying Dak is a game manager type and not deserving of talk that he's great.  He too is playing great.  I can't double down and just ignore it to keep hold of my opinion.  If he emerges and continues to become a better QB then yeah I can be stuck on an old outdated opinion.  And like Kirk, I want to see the season unfold first for Dak.  But if he keeps on that pace, I got an open mind that he is emerging as a better QB.  Kirk and Dak wouldn't be the first QBs in NFL history to improve at a stage of their career. 

 

I’ll concede this point—I have framed my opinion of Kirk as if it’s not possible for him to become elite. I do think there’s potential for him to have an outlier year or two that are elite. Do I think it’s likely? No. I don’t believe this years been elite when looking at the season as a whole and game to game. Obviously, he continues at the rate of the prior 5 weeks, that’s a different story. The schedule gets tough for the Vikes down the stretch though. We’ll see. 

Quote

 

 

He might be great at worse he's good.  And yeah if you agree with that, then I'll merge hands.😀   If your verdict is nothing you see this season convinced you that he's more than just a good QB then we disagree.
 

Still developing a spectrum of knowledge of how to value present day QB numbers, as the league is filled with impressive QB stats. No doubt his recent run has been great though, but the season as a whole appears to be just good (from afar). 
 

Quote

 

 

Clowney isn't a QB.  But I'll stop arguing this point with you because I gather short of a team coming out in retrospect saying they offered a first, which obviously will never happen -- you won't believe anyone whether its Sheehan or whomever that said that's what they heard. 

Who knows, Someday it may come out. Seriously, if it’s proven, then I’m all the way with you on Bruce botching it with the Niners. 

[Veryoldschool]

4 minutes ago, zskins said:

 

Yup you are right. Kirk should have started and RG3 should have been forced to be the understudy instead. 

 

Which one of these guys is tearing up the League this season and which one is riding the pine?  If you haven't figured out who is the talented one yet I can't help you.  One of them is already a major bust and the other might one day get a bust in Canton, deal with it

[zCommander]

19 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

Which one of these guys is tearing up the League this season and which one is riding the pine?  If you haven't figured out who is the talented one yet I can't help you.  One of them is already a major bust and the other might one day get a bust in Canton, deal with it

 

Let me break it down for you. No team will put a 1st round selected QB on the bench over a 4th round picked QB. It doesn't even matter what happened years later. Don't tell me you were Kirk whisper and would have had Kirk starting in 2012 over RG3...lol

 

Bust in Canton talk for Kirk? Your love for Kirk is blinding you old man. 

 

 

[Tsailand]

39 minutes ago, zskins said:

Don't tell me you were Kirk whisper and would have had Kirk starting in 2012 over RG3...lol

 

2012, no, of course not. 

 

I would have started Kirk in 2013.  Probably Kyle would have too, if he had complete control.

 

[SkinsFTW]

3 hours ago, SkinsFanMania said:

 

Aaron Rodgers was in his fourth season before he started starting he was extremely good that year.  There are a lot of QBs, because QBs used to sit before they started.  I didn't even have to think about it before Arod came to mind.  If I wanted to look, I'd find a lot of QBs that came productive in their 4th yr of the rookie contract.  

 

He was productive in his 4th year but he wasn't a difference maker. Favre had them in the NFCCG. Under Rodgers they finished 6-10. They should have just let him test the market or let all of his offensive weapons walk and then franchise him to see if he could do it singlehandedly.

 

 

Also they should have hired the 0-16 Lions DC. I heard he was underrated.

[Mania]

19 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

He was productive in his 4th year but he wasn't a difference maker. Favre had them in the NFCCG. Under Rodgers they finished 6-10. They should have just let him test the market or let all of his offensive weapons walk and then franchise him to see if he could do it singlehandedly.

 

 

Also they should have hired the 0-16 Lions DC. I heard he was underrated.

lmao

[zCommander]

30 minutes ago, Tsailand said:

 

2012, no, of course not. 

 

I would have started Kirk in 2013.  Probably Kyle would have too, if he had complete control.

 

 

Yup. I was all in for Kirk for starting Kirk in 2013 and have RG3 come back after the bye in Dallas. This would have showed us how many games out of 4 can Kirk win. This would have also gave RG3 more time to recover. There were too many egos involved in 2013 for this to happen though. Bruce was not going to give Oswiler type of salary in 2015. In hindsight that would have been the best time to sign him up for the long haul. It was 4 million more per year than Bruce was willing to give up. Bruce is a prefect example of stupid is what stupid does. 

 

What I never understood about Bruce is that it is not your money why the hell are you shopping with your wallet!!!

[SkinsFTW]

They should have signed him BEFORE Osweiler was signed. 16M would have likely done it.

 

Remember how excited/surprised Kirk was about Osweiler getting 18M? That tweet was KC realizing that he's going to be winning the mega millions lottery.

 

The major buffoonery was letting Osweiler, who was even more of an unknown, get signed first.

 

People like to point at Scot M but by now everybody knows that kind of idiocy is Bumbling Bruce's calling card.

 

 

 

Sherff is the next contestant in the Redskins Mega Millions buffoonery sweepstakes.