Redskins' Kirk Cousins: Still far apart on extension terms

[Stymietee]

Sure, just as long as you don't bring up his mental growth as a way of moving away from your assertion that the salary cap or lack thereof has something to do with evaluating players. I have no idea what you are saying here.

Of course he'll learn from his mistakes, and those mistakes will get replaced by others. In the aggregate, he is what he is. Nothing more, nothing less to be gained or loss. We will have to agree to disagree, you have no basis for saying he won't or can't improve. You have an opinion which you are certainly entitled to but you cannot know what you said is true. Really either can I. I can only assume that most of us progress, get smarter with age. Notice I said MOST.

Sure, just as long as you don't bring up his mental growth as a way of moving away from your assertion that the salary cap or lack thereof has something to do with evaluating players. I have no idea what you are saying here.

Refresher.....I wrote this:

Joe Gibbs in all of his glorious Super Bowl time as head coach here, taught us that you could take very average QB's and win by having superior talent around them. Although a different time, it is possible that, this is the plan going forward. If it is, then, Cousins is our guy, and should be made to realize that despite this new era of QB centered play, it will be the team, built specifically to win Super Bowls, because of his limitations that will lead the way. Accordingly, his pay, despite the market, must be based upon his position as a supporting player in a lead role, on a team with superior talent.

To which you responded:


When did Joe Gibbs coach in the salary cap and free agency era?

Apples and oranges.


To which I responded:

WOW!! Let's try this, answer a very basic question in logic. Ready?... Are you sure?....Well, what does the salary cap or lack thereof have to do with evaluating players, QB's or otherwise?


...and your non response to that? (changing the subject)

As for the reference to the Gibbs era. NFL players were highly underpaid back then and it was easier to stash and/or keep players who now a days leave. Do you think the Redskins let Antonio Pierce and Brian Orakpo go during Gibbs era. Just two examples. The landscape of the game has completely.

Correct, you can win a Super Bowl with a superior team (defense) ala Ravens and Tampa Bay but we all know that the teams that win most often have a top QB.

 

[Sharkinva]

Lets be real here for a moment.

Aside from Green Bay and the Rogers transition. Most of the teams that have what you are calling really good QBs had to do two things to get these really good QBs.

1. They had to suck ass so bad that they finished bad enough to pick in the top 3-5 teams in the league.

2. They still had to have an extreme bit of luck (no pun intended) on their side.

And in alot of cases they needed both.

So again I ask... do you think ( or in some cases hope) we will suck badly enough to be able to draft one of these Elite QBs??

And secondly.... do you think we are that lucky??

I think we finish 8-8, it will cost us more than the last trade to get up into the top ten to take the next great hope. And even then there is an even chance we end up with the next Leaf as apposed to the next Luck.

 

[Sportster 72]

Sure, just as long as you don't bring up his mental growth as a way of moving away from your assertion that the salary cap or lack thereof has something to do with evaluating players. I have no idea what you are saying here.

Refresher.....I wrote this:

Joe Gibbs in all of his glorious Super Bowl time as head coach here, taught us that you could take very average QB's and win by having superior talent around them. Although a different time, it is possible that, this is the plan going forward. If it is, then, Cousins is our guy, and should be made to realize that despite this new era of QB centered play, it will be the team, built specifically to win Super Bowls, because of his limitations that will lead the way. Accordingly, his pay, despite the market, must be based upon his position as a supporting player in a lead role, on a team with superior talent.

To which you responded:


When did Joe Gibbs coach in the salary cap and free agency era?

Apples and oranges.


To which I responded:

WOW!! Let's try this, answer a very basic question in logic. Ready?... Are you sure?....Well, what does the salary cap or lack thereof have to do with evaluating players, QB's or otherwise?


...and your non response to that? (changing the subject)

As for the reference to the Gibbs era. NFL players were highly underpaid back then and it was easier to stash and/or keep players who now a days leave. Do you think the Redskins let Antonio Pierce and Brian Orakpo go during Gibbs era. Just two examples. The landscape of the game has completely.

Correct, you can win a Super Bowl with a superior team (defense) ala Ravens and Tampa Bay but we all know that the teams that win most often have a top QB.

I have explained several times Sty. I agreed with your basic principle of building a strong team but illustrated that it is not possible in today's game to keep this team together due to free agency. If you don't understand that then I can't help anymore.

As far as Cousin's goes I have already said you and I will have to agree to disagree. To this point you have no proof that he can not continue to improve. That is your opinion, it is not a fact. Likewise I cannot prove to you that he will improve. Stalemate.

 

[Stymietee]

Sty, I understand what you are saying and agree with most of it. However, this is the statement that you have made a couple of times that many take issue with: "and something that is emininently more easilly replaceable." If KC is so easily replaceable, why haven't we had a QB that is better in the last 20 years? The reality is that a "pretty good" QB is not easily replaceable. Should we always have our eye out for a better talent? Of course. At every position. But if we lose KC next year, we will most definitely be taking a step BACK in production at the most important position on the field. Not only will we be taking a step back, but we will also see the tenures of some of our best players expire as we search and groom KC's replacement. Players such as Williams, Reed, and Kerrigan.

The reality is that KC is more than pretty good in Gruden's offense. He has proven to be very good over the last 2 years, but not without mistakes. He is good enough that with a supporting cast around him, which we are surely building, we can make a run. Maybe as soon as this year. But if we have to restart next year with a new QB at the helm, we have realistically delayed that run by a few years assuming we find the right guy next year. SO the supporting cast we have built starts to crumble and we need to rebuild that again. Wash, rinse, repeat. We never get there.

It really doesn't bother me that the many that you speak of didn't understand what was written, or at best didn't take the time to realize there was a distinction being made between a "competent player in a system that fits him" (which equals "pretty good" by my definition) player and an "elite" one. By any metric that people want to use, Kirk has benefitted from the system that he's in.....AND....has contributed to the success of that system. In either case that doesn't make him irreplaceable. Specifically to my point, what he brings is INDEED "something that is emininently more easilly replaceable." than an "elite," "Superstar," or the "next best thing type player."

For anyone still confused this is what preceded that line:

"I'll concede all of the accolades that you all have placed upon and earned by Kirk Cousins, and give you all an extra "best that we've had in many many years here" to boot...but honestly, all he's actually done is to be competent in a system that fits him. Some will say that this is downplaying Kirk, I disagree, What it is...is not overplaying him. It is, unfortunately, the one thing in life that we humans do when we come across the best that we've ever had, after not having much beforehand. While it's wonderful to imagine what he COULD become, I'll stick to what he currently is as a player, pretty good, and something that is emininently more easilly replaceable."

I'll respond to your other questions in the next post.

 

[Stymietee]

Sty, I understand what you are saying and agree with most of it. However, this is the statement that you have made a couple of times that many take issue with: "and something that is emininently more easilly replaceable." If KC is so easily replaceable, why haven't we had a QB that is better in the last 20 years? The reality is that a "pretty good" QB is not easily replaceable. Should we always have our eye out for a better talent? Of course. At every position. But if we lose KC next year, we will most definitely be taking a step BACK in production at the most important position on the field. Not only will we be taking a step back, but we will also see the tenures of some of our best players expire as we search and groom KC's replacement. Players such as Williams, Reed, and Kerrigan.

The reality is that KC is more than pretty good in Gruden's offense. He has proven to be very good over the last 2 years, but not without mistakes. He is good enough that with a supporting cast around him, which we are surely building, we can make a run. Maybe as soon as this year. But if we have to restart next year with a new QB at the helm, we have realistically delayed that run by a few years assuming we find the right guy next year. SO the supporting cast we have built starts to crumble and we need to rebuild that again. Wash, rinse, repeat. We never get there.

Your question: If KC is so easily replaceable, why haven't we had a QB that is better in the last 20 years?

ANS: What was the formula here for the last 20 years? Hint: It starts with winning off the field.
I've gone back and looked at the moves that were made during this span. During Gibbs 2.0 there really wasn't the drive that he bought in the first stint. In fact, looking in the rear view, it seemed as if he was mostly here for the money and just went along with the BS.

Shanahan actually had no chance at success, mainly because he bought that silly assed former AFCW formula into a division where the name of the game was classic NFCE big boy vs big boy game. We sure wasted a lot of time trying to strike gold in former mines, stripped of their riches. Do I really have to talk about the others?

 

[Stymietee]

Sty, I understand what you are saying and agree with most of it. However, this is the statement that you have made a couple of times that many take issue with: "and something that is emininently more easilly replaceable." If KC is so easily replaceable, why haven't we had a QB that is better in the last 20 years? The reality is that a "pretty good" QB is not easily replaceable. Should we always have our eye out for a better talent? Of course. At every position. But if we lose KC next year, we will most definitely be taking a step BACK in production at the most important position on the field. Not only will we be taking a step back, but we will also see the tenures of some of our best players expire as we search and groom KC's replacement. Players such as Williams, Reed, and Kerrigan.

The reality is that KC is more than pretty good in Gruden's offense. He has proven to be very good over the last 2 years, but not without mistakes. He is good enough that with a supporting cast around him, which we are surely building, we can make a run. Maybe as soon as this year. But if we have to restart next year with a new QB at the helm, we have realistically delayed that run by a few years assuming we find the right guy next year. SO the supporting cast we have built starts to crumble and we need to rebuild that again. Wash, rinse, repeat. We never get there.

YOU WROTE: But if we lose KC next year, we will most definitely be taking a step BACK in production at the most important position on the field. Not only will we be taking a step back.

Disagree, and outlined in great detail how this could be done, but short version, replacing one competent QB that fits this system with another one that, from what I've studied of him, fits this system even better. My truth is, contrary to your truth, that Kirk while an integral part is a certain type of player in demeanor, approach to the game and style of play that I recognize in others. We just are not going to agree on this, I understand that, nor will we agree on Kerrigan who I believe has also peaked.

YOU WROTE: The reality is that KC is more than pretty good in Gruden's offense. He has proven to be very good over the last 2 years, but not without mistakes. He is good enough that with a supporting cast around him, which we are surely building, we can make a run. Maybe as soon as this year. But if we have to restart next year with a new QB at the helm, we have realistically delayed that run by a few years assuming we find the right guy next year. SO the supporting cast we have built starts to crumble and we need to rebuild that again. Wash, rinse, repeat. We never get there.

Again disagree, but I truly admire that you included the qualifier "in Gruden's offense" that makes alot of sense to me, and, from my perspective, is one of the more accurrate portrayals of Kirk that I have read in a long while. Maybe we make a run, and hopefully, we'll all be giving figurative high fives at the end of the season, but it won't be because of any great improvements from Kirk. To me the ONLY way that we get to that ending will be if Kirk just maintains, which is not guaranteed, and there are marked improvements everywhere else. Like Sm I believe that we have seen the best of Cousins, which isn't bad, and from my perspective isn't that hard to replace.......In Gruden's system!

 

[Sportster 72]

Please explain in football terms ... that would be X's and O's why Cousin's can succeed in Gruden's offense but couldn't succeed in lets say the Patriot or Saints offense?

 

[j_y19]

Your question: If KC is so easily replaceable, why haven't we had a QB that is better in the last 20 years?

ANS: What was the formula here for the last 20 years? Hint: It starts with winning off the field.
I've gone back and looked at the moves that were made during this span. During Gibbs 2.0 there really wasn't the drive that he bought in the first stint. In fact, looking in the rear view, it seemed as if he was mostly here for the money and just went along with the BS.

Shanahan actually had no chance at success, mainly because he bought that silly assed former AFCW formula into a division where the name of the game was classic NFCE big boy vs big boy game. We sure wasted a lot of time trying to strike gold in former mines, stripped of their riches. Do I really have to talk about the others?

ok. SO what makes you think that formula has changed? Why would you expect that if we let KC walk, we won't continue that off the field winning strategy that has failed us miserably over the last 20 years?
Here we have a competent QB that has proven to be accurate and can make all the throws. He is developing into a team leader (as evidenced by comments made by his teammates, not conjecture). He fits this offense perfectly in that he is becoming proficient in prereading the defenses and knowing who to throw to resulting in a very quick delivery to playmakers. He himself is not really a playmaker in the sense of when a play breaks down, he can improvise. Probably never will be. But you know what? Neither does Brady, Brees, Ryan or a handful of other SB QBs in the last 10 years. That is not what is expected nor needed from him.
As for has he peaked or not? Who the hell knows. But if you told me that he was going to cap out as a QB that will complete close to 70% of his passes, throw for close to 5000 yds and have half as many INTs as TDs every year, I'd say we are pretty damn fortunate. Give me 2, please.

You talk about our failed strategy for acquiring Qb talent over the last 20 years, but KC represents just the opposite of that. A 4th round talent, home grown, and as he enters his prime years we deem, that being a top 10 QB with certain limitations, just isn't good enough is nothing more than a continuation of that same failed strategy. Lets let our home grown talent walk and jump back into the QB russian roulette arena where there are 8-14 teams every year willing to do desperate things to get that "next best thing", which usually turns into a bust.

I just don't get it. Again, this is not saying that you don't try and upgrade every position on the field, but you don't toss a "pretty good" talent until you have a proven better talent to replace him. And for those that say he isn't worth the money.....please stop. Its all funny money. The total contract value of any player really makes no difference. Rarely do these contracts go to full term (see Romo). What matters is the guaranteed portion and the cap hit. And here is a fact. We sign him to a LTD and his cap hit GOES DOWN this year. This is smart business. Anything else is being penny wise and pound foolish.

 

[deanpet21]

No I am not. I am fully aware of the reports and who supported them myself included .

And Allen deserves the bashing he has taken in regards to his handling of the KC. Negotiations .
Because apparently he has / had final say all along

It appears that Allen killed the 3 year deal when the chance was there to get bit done

What I and everyone else is taking you to task on is your constant lies or misrepresentations about anyone advocating blank checks in regards to his signings

You won't. Search back on previous posts because you damn well know no one has ever uttered such a thing you pushed that false narrative

That reported rumored 3 year deal was a low ball offer to KC. No lies here multiple posters are willing to pay whatever he wants b/c we have no other option. Allen and Co. are handling this thing perfectly. He is playing for us this year. Plus we hold his rights next year on the transition tag or just sign him long term as a FA. There is no downside IMO.

You are the one bashing Allen. That is not a lie or misrepresentation. Multiple postings and cartons bashing Allen. Now Sm and Allen were on the same page regarding KC and now you are back peddling.

 

[deanpet21]

Short answer is he had a deal set up and it as shot down . And it I still the organization. Big time

It was a lowball deal to KC. Basically the same thing you held the Redskins accountable for. No way was KC going to sign that deal. You blamed the Redskins for offering lowball deals but it was really SM. This is hilarious.

 

[deanpet21]

Im curious as to how many will be silently pulling for Cousins to fail miserably.

Because if he plays on the tag, there are only 4 likely outcomes.

1. He tanks, the team finishes miserably and we are in a position to draft the next messiah.

2. He regresses, but the team still finsihes around 8-8, the next Messiah will then be very costly to get

3. He stays about the same, the team finishes with around 10 wins, and we are basically in the same position.

4. He improves, the team still finishes with around 10 wins, and we are basically stuck with paying him even more money or watching him walk.

Only one of these plays out well for the team, but then it would mean we sucked badly. So how many of you will be hoping for the team to fail is the question??

No one hopes the team fails. that is just stupid. A lot of posters on here still want to "wait and see" on KC. You and other posters disagree with that and want to give KC whatever he wants. Now it has been proven that Allen and Sm were on the same page for KC about the "wait and see" approach.

Now with these new reports that Sm was sold on KC and just proves that the "wait and See" poster were actually right. But of course you, skinsdad, socal, and other refuse to admit that.

 

[deanpet21]

I hope we sign him and KC succeeds, I really do. I think he could give us a lot of good years and some playoff wins, hell maaaaybe even a Super Bowl IF he has ALOT of good players around him and an above average defense. Thing is...paying him a shit ton of money and being able to build that kind of roster at the same time will not be easy. Special quarterbacks get paid that kind of money, put an average team on their back and carry their asses to the Lombardi Trophy. I just don't think KC is that guy. Never will be IMO.

Best case scenario for us is that we sign him NOW...on a reasonable long term deal. I don't anyone has used the term blank check skinsdad. But some have pretty well said do what it takes to get the deal done. Which probably means making him the highest paid player in the NFL...TODAY..25 Mill APY minimum, 80 mill guaranteed minimum. That my friend is basically signing a blank check.

And this is what KC wants. He and his agent are playing us like a fucking fiddle. Are we still low balling him?? Possibly. But he is butthurt and feels disrespected because we don't want to give him the richest contract in history because he has had one or maybe two decent seasons?? Said it before, I think short of that contract he is willing to roll the dice and get even MORE money next year. That's the card he is playing. That's the way it looks to me. If that is truly the case then he can kick rocks. JMHO

I agree with your points. the blank check posts came from when the rumors were saying that KC wants to be the highest paid qb in the league with 80-90M g and 30 million per season. When those rumors were out many posters on here said do it b/c we have no other option.

The wait and see approach is the best option here. We could still hold his rights next year if he kills it this year and shows us that he can win and take this team to the playoffs. The only point I disagree with you is about signing him right now. Kc will not sign a reasonable offer right now. That is the whole point. He holds to much leverage right now. So a LTD seems unlikely.

 

[deanpet21]

No one hopes the team fails. that is just stupid. A lot of posters on here still want to "wait and see" on KC. You and other posters disagree with that and want to give KC whatever he wants. Now it has been proven that Allen and Sm were on the same page for KC about the "wait and see" approach.

Now with these new reports that Sm was sold on KC and just proves that the "wait and See" poster were actually right. But of course you, skinsdad, socal, and other refuse to admit that.

* wasn't

 

[deanpet21]

Plus, Sm blames the agent in the contract talks not Redskins front office.

 

[Sharkinva]

I agree with your points. the blank check posts came from when the rumors were saying that KC wants to be the highest paid qb in the league with 80-90M g and 30 million per season. When those rumors were out many posters on here said do it b/c we have no other option.

The wait and see approach is the best option here. We could still hold his rights next year if he kills it this year and shows us that he can win and take this team to the playoffs. The only point I disagree with you is about signing him right now. Kc will not sign a reasonable offer right now. That is the whole point. He holds to much leverage right now. So a LTD seems unlikely.

Do you think he will hold LESS Leverage, or be cheaper next year??

The wait and see approach only works if..

1. You expect him to fail

2. You want to try and make a play for the new Messiah next year, in which case is was stupid to exclusive rights tag him in the first place.

If the team stays around 8-8, the cost of trading into the top ten becomes ridiculous. If the team improves, the cost to sign Kirk becomes way more than any of you would be ok with. The transition tag is a joke of an option, because if some one wants him, and its just about the contract, they will make him an offer the Skins wont match and we get nothing. And if we use the Exclusive rights tag, we are right back in the same boat.

 

[deanpet21]

Do you think he will hold LESS Leverage, or be cheaper next year??

The wait and see approach only works if..

1. You expect him to fail

2. You want to try and make a play for the new Messiah next year, in which case is was stupid to exclusive rights tag him in the first place.

If the team stays around 8-8, the cost of trading into the top ten becomes ridiculous. If the team improves, the cost to sign Kirk becomes way more than any of you would be ok with. The transition tag is a joke of an option, because if some one wants him, and its just about the contract, they will make him an offer the Skins wont match and we get nothing. And if we use the Exclusive rights tag, we are right back in the same boat.

Dr. Doom is back. We discussed this already. If Kc has a great year he gets his long term deal. At that point Danny wont care about the numbers. He gets his LTD and everyone is happy.

If the team goes 8-8 and it depends how we went 8-8 to be honest to judge KC. Hopkins could have another bad year and the defense could fail. So there are many factors to determine this situation. IF Kc blows up and really fails then when FA comes he wouldn't have any leverage and would sign a reasonable deal. Even if KC has the same year like he did last year we sill hold his rights on the transition tag. So there we don't lose in any situation

Plus, lets say KC gets the transition tag we can match any offer. Now who is going to offer huge money for KC next year if he is average or has a good year?

1. 49ers. They will make an offer but they should be picking int he top 5 again next year so they have a chance to draft a QB for a lot less money. So there offer might not be as strong to try to get KC is comet here.

2. Browns. Same situation they will be picking top 5 and have a shot at the top QB's in the draft for cheaper money. Plus does KC really want to go to Cle?

3. Jets. Same situation there teams sucks with no weapons top speak of. I would think they want to give Hacknenburg a shot b/c he is a former 2nd round pick.

To sum up, we don't lose in any situation. Even if KC has a bad year he still could be brought back at a bargin price. So yes Allen and Co are handling this situation perfectly. They are not going to cave under KC's agent asking for the world. You have to respect that.

 

[Sleepy T]

The only point I disagree with you is about signing him right now. Kc will not sign a reasonable offer right now. That is the whole point. He holds to much leverage right now. So a LTD seems unlikely.

Oh, I agree that he likely won't sign a reasonable deal right now (22-23ish APY). That's what pisses me off about the whole situation. He put up some really nice numbers (but other than that hasn't done much of shit) but he thinks he should be the highest paid QB in the game. He and his agent has everyone fooled into thinking that the Redskins are insulting him with a 18-20 million APY, 3 year, 40 million guaranteed or some sorta bullshit contract like that. There really aren't any better options and he knows it. He has us by the balls.

In hindsight, you are prolly right. I look forward to him hitting the market on the TTag and seeing what he could fetch. I don't think he will be any cheaper this year than next and I still hope he signs with us, but yes, I hope the offer sheets humble him a bit.

 

[deanpet21]

Oh, I agree that he likely won't sign a reasonable deal right now (22-23ish APY). That's what pisses me off about the whole situation. He put up some really nice numbers (but other than that hasn't done much of shit) but he thinks he should be the highest paid QB in the game. He and his agent has everyone fooled into thinking that the Redskins are insulting him with a 18-20 million APY, 3 year, 40 million guaranteed or some sorta bullshit contract like that. There really aren't any better options and he knows it. He has us by the balls.

In hindsight, you are prolly right. I look forward to him hitting the market on the TTag and seeing what he could fetch. I don't think he will be any cheaper this year than next and I still hope he signs with us, but yes, I hope the offer sheets humble him a bit.

Exactly right. But having this opinion gets you blasted on here for some reason. If you are not willing to give KC what he wants right now you are a called a KC hater. Its so untrue.

 

[Sharkinva]

Oh, I agree that he likely won't sign a reasonable deal right now (22-23ish APY). That's what pisses me off about the whole situation. He put up some really nice numbers (but other than that hasn't done much of shit) but he thinks he should be the highest paid QB in the game. He and his agent has everyone fooled into thinking that the Redskins are insulting him with a 18-20 million APY, 3 year, 40 million guaranteed or some sorta bullshit contract like that. There really aren't any better options and he knows it. He has us by the balls.

In hindsight, you are prolly right. I look forward to him hitting the market on the TTag and seeing what he could fetch. I don't think he will be any cheaper this year than next and I still hope he signs with us, but yes, I hope the offer sheets humble him a bit.

So again IM going to ask you guys, what on earth makes you think his price will go down? Unless you expect him to fail, his price is only going to go up. For christ sake Mike Glennon just got $15M a year. If the Skins have even the same type of year they had the past two, Kirks price isnt going to go down. Because you are right, he does have them by the balls. And how on earth is it SMART to continue to pay him on a year to year contract that is costing MORE than the long term deal would have. Offer him 5 Years with $60M guaranteed and be done with it. But apparently its smarter to give him $24M now, and think you can get him for less than the $35M it will cost to franchise him next year.

 

[Sharkinva]

Oh, I agree that he likely won't sign a reasonable deal right now (22-23ish APY). That's what pisses me off about the whole situation. .

Have they offered a reasonable deal?? Word is, the last deal they offered was $20M a year with $25 guaranteed...

Is that reasonable considering that he is getting $24M guaranteed on the tag??