Serious Question: Do you regret letting Cousins go?

[Darrell Green Fan]

3 hours ago, OVCChairman said:

 

 

I respectfully disagree.  I don't think Kirk Cousins is worth 6-7 wins on this roster.  There are very few QBs in the league that are worth that much in the win column.  I will say he likely improves a few wins, maybe 3, but to expect any single player to come to any single roster and be able to improve that team by that many games is tough.  It's likely that the Pats would win without Brady, maybe step back a few games, but not 7.  The Saints won with Bridgewater while Brees was out, who is a sure-fire HOF QB.  Tannehill stepped in with Tennessee and has shown what a level of competent QB play can do with a team and we will see how sustainable that is.  I guess Cousin's could have the same type of impact, but i feel like that is a rare instance.  Most of the time 1 player cannot just do it all by themselves.  There is a whole team, and we have a lot of holes.  

 

I can only go by the evidence. As I have pointed out they were 7-26 the 2 seasons prior to Kirk winning the job, 24-23-1 with Kirk, then 9-18 after he left.  

[OVCChairman]

Just now, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

I can only go by the evidence. As I have pointed out they were 7-26 the 2 seasons prior to Kirk winning the job, 24-23-1 with Kirk, then 9-18 after he left.  

 

 

I get that, its definitely an interesting thing to consider.  Hard to imagine this team could win 9 games though, 

[Veryoldschool]

46 minutes ago, OVCChairman said:

 

 

I get that, its definitely an interesting thing to consider.  Hard to imagine this team could win 9 games though, 

 

That is because we didn't watch the 2019 team being led by a 4K yards, 70% completion, 30 TD to 10 INT franchise quarterback like Cousins.  If Cousins had been in the line up in 2019 the Skins would be in the running for the NFC East.  I can assert that with confidence because they were in the division race each year Cousins started for them.

 

His discredited critics here need to finally admit the obvious truth, Kirk Cousins elevated a bottom dwelling Washington Redskins to .500, which is a substantial contribution.  Had they had more talent he would have been able to elevate them further.  He has a better roster to work with in Minnesota now that they are healthy and it will be very interesting how far they are able to go.

[88Comrade2000]

You guys really need to get over Kirk. He’s gone and not coming back.

 

 

[CjSuAvE22]

4 hours ago, OVCChairman said:

 

 

I absolutely did, and one of the biggest complaints was that there were open receivers downfield and Kirk missed them.  That's not just my narrative, there was open frustration in the locker room, as well as frustration from Gruden and the staff.  

 

https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/redskins/so-what-exactly-jay-gruden-saying-about-kirk-cousins

 

Nov, 3 2017

 

 

 

 

Where in that article and gruden interview is anything about him missing receivers and not taking shots....Gruden even said that kirk was playing well....

1 hour ago, Rdskns2000 said:

You guys really need to get over Kirk. He’s gone and not coming back.

 

 

Can they alienate alex smith too...or are we just gonna pay him 24 mil a year for free....anyone who knew football and loved the redskins hearts sunk when that trade was announced evem healthy he wasn't gonna eclipse 16tds...

[Darrell Green Fan]

3 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

You guys really need to get over Kirk. He’s gone and not coming back.

 

 

 

Why?  A good QB is damned hard to find, we've been looking for 30 years. We had one and now he's gone, and his replacement just went 13-29 and that's his best game so far. I think it's a subject worth discussing.  

[Renegade7]

3 hours ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

That is because we didn't watch the 2019 team being led by a 4K yards, 70% completion, 30 TD to 10 INT franchise quarterback like Cousins.  If Cousins had been in the line up in 2019 the Skins would be in the running for the NFC East.  I can assert that with confidence because they were in the division race each year Cousins started for them.

 

His discredited critics here need to finally admit the obvious truth, Kirk Cousins elevated a bottom dwelling Washington Redskins to .500, which is a substantial contribution.  Had they had more talent he would have been able to elevate them further.  He has a better roster to work with in Minnesota now that they are healthy and it will be very interesting how far they are able to go.

 

Seriously taking shots like this about whether hes a good QB or not? That has nothing to do with him wanting to be here or that being in the running but not actually winning the division enabled Bruce to convince Snyder they were closer then they actually were. 

 

Regardless of if someone likes or dislikes Kirk, this thread wasnt about if he was a good QB and still isnt.  It's about are we better off without him.  Your arguement that he proped up this franchise actually helps the arguement it's better hes gone because it fully exposes how terrible Allen really is.  

 

Saying hes a good QB is not the same as saying we should've kept him.  Would you give him the contract the Vikings did and still not make the playoffs? I wouldnt, and that's more about Allen putting around him what the Vikings have. Which would never happen.  This idea if we kept Kirk wed eventually be the Vikings is a myth, we replaced his two 1000 receivers with a first round bust and a QB who cant catch, hed rot here and our fan base would still leave in droves.

10 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

Why?  A good QB is damned hard to find, we've been looking for 30 years. We had one and now he's gone, and his replacement just went 13-29 and that's his best game so far. I think it's a subject worth discussing.  

 

I do too, but requires too many "what ifs" to make it make sense on what could've been versus what actually happened.

[Darrell Green Fan]

10 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Would you give him the contract the Vikings did and still not make the playoffs? I wouldnt, and that's more about Allen putting around him what the Vikings have. Which would never happen.  This idea if we kept Kirk wed eventually be the Vikings is a myth, we replaced his two 1000 receivers with a first round bust and a QB who cant catch, hed rot here and our fan base would still leave in droves.

 

I do too, but requires too many "what ifs" to make it make sense on what could've been versus what actually happened.

 

 

I can see why you feel this way. I do not. As I posted Kirk made us at least competitive, we were playing meaningful games in December. Now we are a complete laughing stock. I'll take the former.  

 

As for the contract how much bigger is it than the Alex Smith deal?  Skins are paying him an average of $23.4 Mil/year or 4, Vikes are paying  Kirk an average of $28 million/year.  At least with Kirk he is younger and never gets hurt, something that is constantly overlooked.  Instead they sunk a ton of money into a QB on the downside, even if he had not been hurt Alex Smith showed to be the road to nowhere. 

[Renegade7]

9 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

 

I can see why you feel this way. I do not. As I posted Kirk made us at least competitive, we were playing meaningful games in December. Now we are a complete laughing stock. I'll take the former.  

 

I cant change your mind on that, I'll jus say I'm focusing on bigger picture of choosing getting rid of Allen over keeping Cousins.

 

9 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

As for the contract how much bigger is it than the Alex Smith deal?  Skins are paying him an average of $23.4 Mil/year or 4, Vikes are paying  Kirk an average of $28 million/year.  At least with Kirk he is younger and never gets hurt, something that is constantly overlooked.  Instead they sunk a ton of money into a QB on the downside, even if he had not been hurt Alex Smith showed to be the road to nowhere. 

 

Cousins contract is a fully guaranteed.  Alex has an out in his contract if it went south, Kirk's doesnt.

[Darrell Green Fan]

18 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I cant change your mind on that, I'll jus say I'm focusing on bigger picture of choosing getting rid of Allen over keeping Cousins.

 

 

Cousins contract is a fully guaranteed.  Alex has an out in his contract if it went south, Kirk's doesnt.

 

I realize that  but only one team is trying to get out of the contract they signed with their QB and it's not the Vikes.   Maybe they had some regret this time last year but not now.  They have a legit starting QB, with flaws no doubt, and we will spend the next 30 years trying to find one that's as good. And of course the Redskins are the only team we've ever seen to allow a QB this good to simply walk for nothing.

 

 

[Veryoldschool]

55 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I cant change your mind on that, I'll jus say I'm focusing on bigger picture of choosing getting rid of Allen over keeping Cousins.

 

 

The Skins lost Cousins but Allen is still here.  You may assume Allen gets fired but it hasn't happened and it might not happen.

 

55 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Cousins contract is a fully guaranteed.  Alex has an out in his contract if it went south, Kirk's doesnt.

 

Cousins contract is fully guaranteed because he had the leverage to be offered fully guaranteed contracts by 2 NFL franchises, he choose the Vikings instead of the Jets.  Kirk is playing so well that I think his next contract is also fully guaranteed, he's money.

[Renegade7]

1 hour ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

 

The Skins lost Cousins but Allen is still here.  You may assume Allen gets fired but it hasn't happened and it might not happen.

 

This is fair, we might not agree on everything, but keep in mind I get how much of our disagreements are on facts versus opinion.  Allen is still here, and if hes here for another 10 years my opinion might be different.  This has all the hallmarks of what should be a final year, but until it is...

 

1 hour ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

Cousins contract is fully guaranteed because he had the leverage to be offered fully guaranteed contracts by 2 NFL franchises, he choose the Vikings instead of the Jets.  Kirk is playing so well that I think his next contract is also fully guaranteed, he's money.

 

Fully guaranteed contracts are not normal last I checked.  That was a desperate attempt by the Vikings to get him to sign, I'd be shocked if they did that again.  Can you imagine if he broke his leg the way Alex did?  

[Mania]

On 11/23/2019 at 10:02 AM, Fat Stupid Loser said:

I agree, what Bruce did was highly irresponsible. Or more likely incompetent. Kirk would have taken your offer in a heartbeat back then. But Bruce wouldn't know a franchise QB if one landed on him in the 4th round through no effort of his own. Oh....wait.  Then playing Bruce ego/power trip games, both destroying the relationship and driving the cost of the franchise QB through the roof, so that people could say he isn't worth that much, so let him go. You say Kirk doesn't deserve a fully guaranteed salary, just because nobody else has ever received one? Why? The market obviously disagrees with this stance. There were teams who couldn't wait to pay him 30M guaranteed. He is worth what the market says he is.

  Now, you can argue that the market for QBs is outrageous. I would whole-heartedly agree. There isn't a football player in the world worth 1/20th of what they make. But that's what this society pays athletes. So if you want a real franchise QB for his career, you either need to be good enough at your GM job to recognize one early and get him locked up "cheap" for a few years only, (knowing next time you will have to pay him a monster contract. paying the monster contract in inevitable at some point) or pay him now.  Bruce did neither.  Nor after destroying the relationship so that he wouldn't play for you and jacking his cost up, did he get anything in return for his franchise QB. A triple fail!!!!!  

Cousins was the best thing to happen to this franchise in 25 years, (which is pretty sad actually, but nevertheless)  huge loss.

I don't remember anyone else offering fully guaranteed contracts, but you are right, since the Vikings paid the market obviously thought he was worth it and this season he is absolutely showing that.  He didn't show that last season, but I don't believe he would be as good without the talent he currently has around him either.  What I mean by that is the Vikings were pretty good under Case Keenum and they had the same receivers.    I'm happy he got the money though, as I was a fan of his and sad he was pushed away.  

[Veryoldschool]

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Seriously taking shots like this about whether hes a good QB or not? That has nothing to do with him wanting to be here or that being in the running but not actually winning the division enabled Bruce to convince Snyder they were closer then they actually were. 

 

Regardless of if someone likes or dislikes Kirk, this thread wasnt about if he was a good QB and still isnt.  It's about are we better off without him.  Your arguement that he proped up this franchise actually helps the arguement it's better hes gone because it fully exposes how terrible Allen really is.  

 

You assume that losing the franchise QB and falling from .500 to 2 win team is going to automatically led to effective changes and improvement.  I don't see it that way at all I think it is much more likely to improve incrementally from a .500 to a 10+ win team that is capable of playoff run.

 

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Saying hes a good QB is not the same as saying we should've kept him.  Would you give him the contract the Vikings did and still not make the playoffs? I wouldnt, and that's more about Allen putting around him what the Vikings have. Which would never happen.  This idea if we kept Kirk wed eventually be the Vikings is a myth, we replaced his two 1000 receivers with a first round bust and a QB who cant catch, hed rot here and our fan base would still leave in droves.

 

I do too, but requires too many "what ifs" to make it make sense on what could've been versus what actually happened.

 

Sure I would've given him that contract if that have secured him but I think they are just too stupid to ever value Cousins as the should've.  As for Kirk's deal, haven't 7 or 8 players gotten even richer deals since he signed his?  Cousins is really good and it would have been much easier to build around him than crash and burn and hope to find another Top 10 franchise QB and build around him.

 

Snyder and company make poor choices so it is unlikely they would've identified the right guys to build around Kirk but I think their chances of building a winner without Kirk are far less.  I hope Haskins works out but the contrast between his first few starts and Kirk's first start in Cleveland isn't encouraging.  I wonder now if Haskins will be able to improve enough to ever match Kirk's first performance.

[skinsmarydu]

I actually had visions of the Spurrier "fun n gun" with Robert and Kirk on that draft night. 

OK, it was the booze. But still...we shoulda kept Kirk. Like I said before our game against them, he has weaponry now. He's got good WRs, 2 great RBs, and he's not afraid to run himself (and slide). 

We'd be a helluva lot better now with our current offense if we had Kirk. 

[Veryoldschool]

18 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Fully guaranteed contracts are not normal last I checked.  That was a desperate attempt by the Vikings to get him to sign, I'd be shocked if they did that again.  Can you imagine if he broke his leg the way Alex did?  

 

If Kirk got hurt than the Vikings would be in the same boat the Skins are in now, paying a guy who is hurt.  You undermined your argument.

 

The Jets offered Cousins a 90M guaranteed contract but Cousins took less because he felt the Vikings were ready to win.  Last year much of their OL and and Cook were hurt so the offense was very imbalanced.  They invested in their OL and drafted a another running back to build around Kirk and the investments made them better.  The Vikings are 8-3 now and look like they are on their way to 10+ wins and a playoff berth.  The Skins could've made choices like this had they been properly managed but a 

[Renegade7]

7 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

If Kirk got hurt than the Vikings would be in the same boat the Skins are in now, paying a guy who is hurt.  You undermined your argument.

 

No, because Alex injury is career threatening with an out after 3 years.  If Kirk got hurt Vikings would be in hook for entire contract, every single dime.  That's why no one does that in the NFL.

 

Quote

The Jets offered Cousins a 90M guaranteed contract but Cousins took less because he felt the Vikings were ready to win.  Last year much of their OL and and Cook were hurt so the offense was very imbalanced.  They invested in their OL and drafted a another running back to build around Kirk and the investments made them better.  The Vikings are 8-3 now and look like they are on their way to 10+ wins and a playoff berth.  The Skins could've made choices like this had they been properly managed but a 

 

This is why I want to stop responding, because at some point we need to accept that what the Redskins could've done they didnt, and that's why hes gone.  If this was a top rate organization that jus needed a QB, hed still be here. It definetly would've played out differently and not got to point of needing to offer what the Vikings did.

[CjSuAvE22]

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

 

 

 

Fully guaranteed contracts are not normal last I checked.  That was a desperate attempt by the Vikings to get him to sign, I'd be shocked if they did that again.  Can you imagine if he broke his leg the way Alex did?  

Its not normal to let a top 10 qb in the league walk either had that happened a lot of fully guaranteed contracts would pop up

[Thirtyfive2seven]

at least the Redskins are all set at QB now with Haskins... lol

[Renegade7]

37 minutes ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

Its not normal to let a top 10 qb in the league walk either had that happened a lot of fully guaranteed contracts would pop up

That's not defending what the Redskins did, cant have this conversation if every point that's made is taken as taking sides.  It's like we keep forgetting this took two to tango and neither wanted to dance.

[CjSuAvE22]

1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

That's not defending what the Redskins did, cant have this conversation if every point that's made is taken as taking sides.  It's like we keep forgetting this took two to tango and neither wanted to dance.

On a clean slate would you trade kirk cousins for alex smith straight up in 2018?

[Renegade7]

Just now, CjSuAvE22 said:

On a clean slate would you trade kirk cousins for alex smith straight up in 2018?

 

I want to answer your question, I'm not sure I understand it.  In a vacuum, I'd rather have Cousins, because he was better and younger.  I can think of a million things I hated about how that went down, getting nothing for Cousins and then extending Alex had to be 1a and 1b for me.  

 

We should've let Scott trade Cousins when he first brought it up, because at the time of Cousins first complete season, I wasnt on board for the extension, so dont want to say I was for it, I know I wasnt, my post history would show that I wasnt.  

 

The problem with saying we should've kept Cousins is where in time do you go back to to change our mind?  I dont want to say I full scale regret letting him go because the scenario that lead to him leaving was not straight forward.  It was a clinic in what not to do with someone who knows someone will overpay him even if we dont.

 

Cousins at some point was so mad at Allen there was no way to bring him back the franchise tag was jus Allen's way of pushing off the inevitble, he played chicken like he did with Trent and got ran the F over.

[Veryoldschool]

2 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I want to answer your question, I'm not sure I understand it.  In a vacuum, I'd rather have Cousins, because he was better and younger.  I can think of a million things I hated about how that went down, getting nothing for Cousins and then extending Alex had to be 1a and 1b for me.  

 

We should've let Scott trade Cousins when he first brought it up, because at the time of Cousins first complete season, I wasnt on board for the extension, so dont want to say I was for it, I know I wasnt, my post history would show that I wasnt.  

 

The problem with saying we should've kept Cousins is where in time do you go back to to change our mind?  I dont want to say I full scale regret letting him go because the scenario that lead to him leaving was not straight forward.  It was a clinic in what not to do with someone who knows someone will overpay him even if we dont.

 

Cousins at some point was so mad at Allen there was no way to bring him back the franchise tag was jus Allen's way of pushing off the inevitble, he played chicken like he did with Trent and got ran the F over.

 

You didn't want to extend Cousins after 2015?   After being that wrong in 2015 why do you rely on your poor judgement now?  You were clearly wrong then and even now you refuse to grasp the obvious, Cousins is really good.    I don't know if you are one of the broken hearted Griffin fans but it doesn't matter you're a poor judge of QB talent, maybe you have a good handle on other parts of the game but clueless about QBs.

[CjSuAvE22]

4 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

You didn't want to extend Cousins after 2015?   After being that wrong in 2015 why do you rely on your poor judgement now?  You were clearly wrong then and even now you refuse to grasp the obvious, Cousins is really good.    I don't know if you are one of the broken hearted Griffin fans but it doesn't matter you're a poor judge of QB talent, maybe you have a good handle on other parts of the game but clueless about QBs.

I think griffins demise goes hand in hand with the low opinion on cousins for a lotta fans, not sure why but thats how it is..

[Renegade7]

3 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

 

You didn't want to extend Cousins after 2015?   After being that wrong in 2015 why do you rely on your poor judgement now?  You were clearly wrong then and even now you refuse to grasp the obvious, Cousins is really good.    I don't know if you are one of the broken hearted Griffin fans but it doesn't matter you're a poor judge of QB talent, maybe you have a good handle on other parts of the game but clueless about QBs.

 

Dont be disrespectful because you dont agree with me on extending him or giving him what the Vikings did.  Did you want to extend him after 2015?  Did you want to give him the Vikings contract the year he left? You brought up he turned down the Jets, what makes you think he wouldnt of told us the same?  I'm not a bitter Griffin fan, this is such a message board way of approaching this conversation. 

2 minutes ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

I think griffins demise goes hand in hand with the low opinion on cousins for a lotta fans, not sure why but thats how it is..

 

Not sure what this means, I know jus because Cousins was best QB we had this century wasnt saying much when you looked at his competition.  Franchises like the Ravens destroyed themselves overpaying their QBs, I didnt want that to be us.