Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Serious Question: Do you regret letting Cousins go?


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Cousins was leading us to 8-8 every year. 

 

I don't understand your point. Both guys had success and failures in different ways. Neither was going to save the team.

 

Bruce Allen was here.

 

Cousins was gone.  And he was never offered what they ultimately doled out to Smith.  It was roll with McCoy and a FA or trade and extend a perennial 'meh' QB with a ton of guaranteed money.  This has nothing to do with Cousins and everything to do with the horrible trade and extension.  I wanted them to go with McCoy in 2018.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

Cousins was gone.  And he was never offered what they ultimately doled out to Smith.  It was roll with McCoy and a FA or trade and extend a perennial 'meh' QB with a ton of guaranteed money.  This has nothing to do with Cousins and everything to do with the horrible trade and extension.  I wanted them to go with McCoy in 2018.

 

1) How do you know what he was and wasn't offered?

 

2) If it has nothing to do with your Cousins thoughts, why rag on Smith when the team was remarkably 6-3 (likely 6-4) with Smith at the helm?

 

3) If your take was the FO bungled it, I think you're in alignment with literally everyone. Bruce Allen.

 

4) Why do you think Cousins actually wanted to stay after they blew it with him initially?

 

5) Using "meh" QB to speak on Alex Smith's stats is more than an acceptable criticism. However, since 2011, Smith's team's records were: 13-3, 6-2-1, 11-4, 8-7, 11-5, 11-4, 9-6, 6-4. Career his team's held a 94-66-1 record. At some point, people need to accept that Smith was a very capable quarterback. His contract was a mistake. As was needing to get him in the first place. But let's not blame Smith for that.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I regret they let him go.  He just won a playoff game, something the Skins haven’t done since ‘05.

 

Personally, I think it was Dan who drove the decision.  Jsteelz said as much years ago, because Dan didn’t want Shanny to be right.  Cousins was Shanny’s guy.

 

Dan made the same call on Brad Johnson years earlier, who then went on to win a Super Bowl w/ the Bucs.  This is history repeating itself.  Hope Dan stays out of these decisions in the future.

Edited by Andre The Giant
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

Haha.

 

I'm just saying that it was kind of hilarious that to you "Alex Smith working here" meant we'd be 8-8.

 

Bro 8-8 isn't working despite the fact that Bumbling Bruce and Doofus Dan have convinced you that it is. 8-8 is garbage.

 

Look at the Patriots record for evidence of what working looks like, or even the Packers or Steelers.

 

Ok then why are we at page 41 of the how much we miss Kirk "26-30-1" Cousins thread? If 8-8 is exactly what we were replacing with Cousins on average. Actually a bit better. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Andre The Giant said:

I regret they let him go.  He just won a playoff game, something the Skins haven’t done since ‘05.

 

Personally, I think it was Dan who drove the decision.  Jsteelz said as much years ago, because Dan didn’t want Shanny to be right.  Cousins was Shanny’s guy.

 

Dan made the same call on Brad Johnson years earlier, who then went on to win a Super Bowl w/ the Bucs.  This is history repeating itself.  Hope Dan stays out of these decisions in the future.

 

We did go to playoffs with Kirk. We just didn't win with him though.

 

I don't think Dan was involved in Kirk's contract drama. That credit goes to Bruce and his cheap ass. Ironic that his cheap ass was shown the door. 😊

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, KDawg said:

1) How do you know what he was and wasn't offered?

 

2) If it has nothing to do with your Cousins thoughts, why rag on Smith when the team was remarkably 6-3 (likely 6-4) with Smith at the helm?

 

3) If your take was the FO bungled it, I think you're in alignment with literally everyone. Bruce Allen.

 

4) Why do you think Cousins actually wanted to stay after they blew it with him initially?

 

5) Using "meh" QB to speak on Alex Smith's stats is more than an acceptable criticism. However, since 2011, Smith's team's records were: 13-3, 6-2-1, 11-4, 8-7, 11-5, 11-4, 9-6, 6-4. Career his team's held a 94-66-1 record. At some point, people need to accept that Smith was a very capable quarterback. His contract was a mistake. As was needing to get him in the first place. But let's not blame Smith for that.

 

1) Was reported by Bruce Allen himself.  $53 million guaranteed.  Alex Smith, assuming he never got injured, was due $71 million (fully guaranteed) if he made it to the 5th day of the 2019 league year (which...the Redskins were not going to cut him after 1 season).

 

2) Is because Smith is quite possibly the worst free agent signing (for a quarterback) in the last decade.  

 

3) is correct.  Bruce Allen should have been fired the instant he extended Alex Smith.

 

4) I don't think Cousins wanted to stay here after the end of the 2016 season.

 

5) I don't blame Alex Smith.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

1) Was reported by Bruce Allen himself.  $53 million guaranteed.  Alex Smith, assuming he never got injured, was due $71 million (fully guaranteed) if he made it to the 5th day of the 2019 league year (which...the Redskins were not going to cut him after 1 season).

 

2) Is because Smith is quite possibly the worst free agent signing (for a quarterback) in the last decade.  

 

3) is correct.  Bruce Allen should have been fired the instant he extended Alex Smith.

 

4) I don't think Cousins wanted to stay here after the end of the 2016 season.

 

5) I don't blame Alex Smith.  

 

1) Bruce Allen.

 

2) He wasn't a free agent signing. And I disagree. It's amplified by his injury, but its revisionist history. Again, 6-3 (likely 6-4).

 

3) I know!

 

4/5) So why rag on him to support your claim that Bruce Allen was a bungling douchecanoe?

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, KDawg said:

He wasn't a free agent signing. And I disagree. It's amplified by his injury, but its revisionist history. Again, 6-3 (likely 6-4).

 

So why rag on him to support your claim that Bruce Allen was a bungling douchecanoe?

 

Extending him after trading for him made him essentially a free agent signing.  Revisionist history is pointing out his record here as if it was some sort of indication of being on the cusp of a playoff run.  I "rag on him" because he's not as good as many fans make him out to be.  And I know that there is a very real possibility that if he's healthy going into next year that he will be the starter.  And I would loathe that.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

Extending him after trading for him made him essentially a free agent signing. 

 

It literally doesn't though. 

 

9 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

Revisionist history is pointing out his record here as if it was some sort of indication of being on the cusp of a playoff run. 

 

Do you remember who was in the lead of our division that year and what record won it? We were, factually, on the cusp of a playoff berth. A run probably not. But we weren't getting that with Cousins either. And yes, having the best record in a bad division (that struggled again this season) is some sort of indication that we may have made it into the playoffs. 

 

9 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

I "rag on him" because he's not as good as many fans make him out to be.  And I know that there is a very real possibility that if he's healthy going into next year that he will be the starter.  And I would loathe that.  

 

So basically admitting that you feel a certain type of way and you are willing to make up whatever argument you need to justify that feeling. Facts be damned. Its a fact that he wasn't a free agent. You are saying otherwise cause you feel like it. Its a fact that we were winning games and a favorite to win our division. You are saying otherwise because you feel like it. We dont have to disagree on facts. We can disagree that he was a solid football player. But come on man. Some **** is just true. 

 

(correct me if im wrong about the division stuff, but I seem to remember the eagles and Cowboys being about 2 games behind us at the start of the broken leg game) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Phew, we're now fighting over someone saying extending Smith was 'like a free agent' signing.

 

I'll take it one further - it was actually worse than a free agent signing.  We gave assets away AND signed him to the largest possible contract he could ever imagine at that point in his career.  Bruce gave him a Day 1 free agency contract.

 

It was a move made in a sad attempt to save face, by a man who sadly believed 'we're close'.  It was a move that set the franchise back another several years, made by a man who had already set the franchise back several years.

 

And none of that is Alex Smith's fault.  He damn well should have demanded what he demanded to come here.  I don't blame him one iota for getting every single dollar he could.  I also don't think he's a terrible QB and you can definitely be competitive with him.  But just up and inserting him onto this team, in Jay's offense, at Alex's age, and thinking he was going to take this 'close' team even closer to the promise land was a fools dream.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Phew, we're now fighting over someone saying extending Smith was 'like a free agent' signing.

 

Trying to correct - not fight. Facts should not be ignored or added to just to fit your argument. 

 

3 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I'll take it one further - it was actually worse than a free agent signing.  We gave assets away AND signed him to the largest possible contract he could ever imagine at that point in his career.  Bruce gave him a Day 1 free agency contract.

 

It was a move made in a sad attempt to save face, by a man who sadly believed 'we're close'.  It was a move that set the franchise back another several years, made by a man who had already set the franchise back several years.

 

And none of that is Alex Smith's fault.  He damn well should have demanded what he demanded to come here.  I don't blame him one iota for getting every single dollar he could.  I also don't think he's a terrible QB and you can definitely be competitive with him.  But just up and inserting him onto this team, in Jay's offense, at Alex's age, and thinking he was going to take this 'close' team even closer to the promise land was a fools dream.

 

Perfect example is this ^^^ All true for the most part. Not alot of feeling or assertions to fit a narrative. Bruce was an idiot, made a bad move, and he set us back again and again. All true. 

 

 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Llevron said:

It literally doesn't though. 

 

 

Do you remember who was in the lead of our division that year and what record won it? We were, factually, on the cusp of a playoff berth. A run probably not. But we weren't getting that with Cousins either. And yes, having the best record in a bad division (that struggled again this season) is some sort of indication that we may have made it into the playoffs. 

 

So basically admitting that you feel a certain type of way and you are willing to make up whatever argument you need to justify that feeling. Facts be damned. Its a fact that he wasn't a free agent. You are saying otherwise cause you feel like it. Its a fact that we were winning games and a favorite to win our division. You are saying otherwise because you feel like it. We dont have to disagree on facts. We can disagree that he was a solid football player. But come on man. Some **** is just true. 

 

(correct me if im wrong about the division stuff, but I seem to remember the eagles and Cowboys being about 2 games behind us at the start of the broken leg game) 

 

Smith had 1 year left on his contract.  We traded Fuller for him and then extended him.  It's no different than re-signing him at the end of 2018 when he was a free agent.  If you want to get nit-picky over semantics, that's fine.  

 

If Smith didn't get injured, the Skins were traveling to face the 5-5 Cowboys in week 12 for the division lead.  And week 13 would have been against the Eagles (who were hovering around .500 as well and in the hunt for the division).  

 

It was not a fact that we were the favorite to win the division.  I don't "feel" a certain way to say that after trading for a player and then preemptively extending him was like a free agent signing.  It's a fact that we were 1 game above .500 before Smith got hurt (because the facts are that we were well on our way to losing that game had he not got injured).  Everything else is pure speculation as to what would have happened if Smith stayed healthy.  It's a fact that we were averaging 17 points after the buy week with Smith as our quarterback (18 points if you included the entire season).  It's a fact that after his injury, the offense averaged 16 points per game. 

Edited by DJHJR86
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Phew, we're now fighting over someone saying extending Smith was 'like a free agent' signing.

 

 

Have you ever seen a free agent signing where not only do you dole out big money, but you also give up a player?

 

That's a strange free agent signing. 

 

And that point wasn't made as a nitpick. It was made because its very different than a FA signing. That doesn't mean its a good or bad thing. Just more to it than signing a free agent.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
3 hours ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

Cousins was gone.  And he was never offered what they ultimately doled out to Smith. 

 

They offered Kirk almost exactly what they doled out to Smith.

 

Alex: 55M signing bonus

Kirk: 53M signing bonus

 

Alex: 71M guaranteed for injury and if he's still on the roster as of March 7 2019

Kirk: 72M guaranteed for injury

 

Since Kirk never signed the contract we don't know if the 72M was also guaranteed if he was still on the roster at the start of the 2018 season (early March). However (and I went into this at the time), damn near every single QB contract that size did indeed make the player's 3rd season salary fully guaranteed if they were still on the roster at the beginning of the new NFL season the next year, which would have been early March, 2018. Giving Kirk 53M which includes his 2018 salary pretty much guaranteed he's not getting cut after one year. And the fact that they did this very contract for Kirk's replacement just bolsters the idea that they did offer the same guarantee for his third year.

 

The main difference between Alex and Kirk was not the amount, it was that Kirk was already guaranteed 24M from the franchise tag for 2017, so--as Kirk said at the time--the Skins' offer was basically like offering a 2-year extension onto that.

 

 

 

And as I stated earlier in the thread, Kirk only wanted a fully guaranteed 3-yr deal, which we did not offer to him or Alex.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, wit33 said:


Ya, I’ve researched all the stats and posted previously, it’s pretty wild how constant the variables I listed are throughout his last 8 years or so. Uncanny, really. 
 

My guess is Smith is very aware of these statistics and the way he discusses the nuances of a game seems to support it as well. With that said, I can understand a fan not valuing the variables listed and not believing his floor/ceiling is unable to lead a team to a SB or an elite level. 

 

The most interesting thing in Smith's career is that he was twice a good starter on a good teams when the head coach decided that he simply was not good enough.

 

I'm not sure that has happened since I've really been watching football. (I don't know how Craig Morton's career ended in Denver for example).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Llevron said:

Actually know know what **** it. Alex Smith was the worst QB FA signing in NFL history. Lets just stick with that. Makes my point for me. 

 

Glad you came around.  😉

Edited by DJHJR86
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Califan007 said:

Alex: 71M guaranteed for injury and if he's still on the roster as of March 7 2019

Kirk: 72M guaranteed for injury

 

And yet...Kirk's was only guaranteed for injury.  Smith's was guaranteed for injury or if he was still on the active roster in March.  Bruce Allen never mentioned this in his statement about the negotiations with Cousins.  At the time, Stafford was guaranteed $60.5 million.  Bruce Allen's statement said that Cousins was going to be the "2nd highest paid QB in terms of guaranteed money", meaning the $54 million was accurate.  

 

But what is ironic is that Cousins made $44 million in guaranteed money in 2016 and 2017.  Alex Smith made $40 million fully guaranteed in 2018.  The same amount that the Vikings wound up paying Cousins for 3 years.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

The most interesting thing in Smith's career is that he was twice a good starter on a good teams when the head coach decided that he simply was not good enough.

 

I'm not sure that has happened since I've really been watching football. (I don't know how Craig Morton's career ended in Denver for example).


He’s like the Ricky Rubio of the NBA lol

 

Ya, he’s had an interesting career and was replaced by two thought to be game changers in Kaepernick (ended up being the wrong decision) and the other who worked out in Mahomes (generational talent). 
 

Definitely interesting. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

And yet...Kirk's was only guaranteed for injury.  Smith's was guaranteed for injury or if he was still on the active roster in March.  Bruce Allen never mentioned this in his statement about the negotiations with Cousins.  At the time, Stafford was guaranteed $60.5 million.  Bruce Allen's statement said that Cousins was going to be the "2nd highest paid QB in terms of guaranteed money", meaning the $54 million was accurate.  

 

But what is ironic is that Cousins made $44 million in guaranteed money in 2016 and 2017.  Alex Smith made $40 million fully guaranteed in 2018.  The same amount that the Vikings wound up paying Cousins for 3 years.

 

 

Bruce Allen didn't need to go over every detail of the offer, he just went over the highlights. For instance, he didn't mention incentives...so does that mean it's because there weren't any? Bruce didn't mention anything about workout bonuses...should we just assume it's because none were included in their offer?

 

If we don't know--and we do not--I prefer looking at what the Skins have done in similar circumstances, along with what the rest of the NFL tends to do in those same circumstances. And what I saw was "guaranteed for injury" was used to describe salaries that aren't guaranteed at signing but became guaranteed the minute year two begins. So the guarantee fo injury only really applies to the first year of the contract...not the entire length of the contract. Guaranteeing QBs 3rd year salary in their second year was amazingly commonplace.

 

And yeah, that tidbit about how much the Skins shelled out for QBs between 2016-2018 is just another reason Bruce's termination was overdue...which I was also saying after the Skins just let Cousins walk and more came to light. Which is strange, because it would also mean I'd lose my job as Bruce Allen's mouthpiece lol...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The details of the two contracts are inconsequential.

 

Both the contracts Smith signed with Washington and the one Cousins signed in Minnesota are within line with what starting QBs with decent pedigrees get.

 

The reason Smith is here and Cousins is not is because Bruce Allen missed his window to sign Cousins at a discount and then got a wild hair up his ass about it. He was determined to "win the negotiation with Kirk and that somehow ended up with Cousins making more money in a five year period than any NFL player in history. (I'm not sure that's true to the dollar, but it's damn close to being true).

 

Here' something fun to ponder.


Haskins flames out, and Rivera has no interest in starting all over again with a rookie.

 

So he signs a 32 year old Cousins to the three year contract Bruce didn't want to give him four years earlier.

 

Come on…..how amazing would that be?

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Jumbo locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...