Redskins' Kirk Cousins: Still far apart on extension terms

[skinsdad62]

What the hell are you talking about? plus proofread your messages before posting. no hate here.

What , you are a grammar teacher now ? All your comments deal with IC asking for some hge deal. With no proof at all . Now you moved he goal piss his year as well

 

[deanpet21]

Because we gagged it is exactly why he should and will get a better deal. It has nothing to do with him being butthurt, and everything to do with us failing to commit in a timely manner. We could have signed him for $20M per year on average a year ago, that was his ask.. we offered him $15M a year. So now a year later, we have basically said you are worth $24M a year to us by tagging him yet again. Why should he take LESS money??

Right now you would consider Kirk at $20M annually a bargain right?? Too bad they didnt make that offer until THEY drove his price up to $24M a year.

Sm said he doenst make deals off the franchise tag numbers.

 

[deanpet21]

What , you are a grammar teacher now ? All your comments deal with IC asking for some hge deal. With no proof at all . Now you moved he goal piss his year as well

I said 100 times I was basing it off the rumor. Your boy SM doesn't negotiate deals off the franchise tag numbers. He came out and already said that. You are giving me this crap after the 2015 season he deserved a big contract with 44mg. When all of the current and former Gms said the tag was the smart move.

 

[Sharkinva]

I said 100 times I was basing it off the rumor. Your boy SM doesn't negotiate deals off the franchise tag numbers. He came out and already said that. You are giving me this crap after the 2015 season he deserved a big contract with 44mg. When all of the current and former Gms said the tag was the smart move.

Again, how is it the smart move now though??

If Kirk succeeds his price goes up.
If he stays about where he is, we have to decide to either pay his price any way, or go into the draft.


Let me ask you, barring a rash of injuries, where do you think this team finishes?? If you say anything more than 8 wins, then drafting a rookie is likely out of the question. Because 8 wins means either trading up for a QB, or standing pat and taking one of the 2nd tier QBs and likely over drafting him because we are now desperate again.

 

[Sleepy T]

Yes, I guess 20 million would be pretty good NOW, but once again, last year the 20 mill ask was slightly less than a year removed contracts for 2 Super Bowl QBs for KC who at that point had one decent year under his belt. The more I think about it the more ridiculous that deal last year sounds. The Texans fell for that fools gold and lost some major cash because of it. Not sure how anyone can in hindsight be mad because our FO had the same reservations and decided to take a wait and see approach.

 

[Sharkinva]

Yes, I guess 20 million would be pretty good NOW, but once again, last year the 20 mill ask was slightly less than a year removed contracts for 2 Super Bowl QBs for KC who at that point had one decent year under his belt. The more I think about it the more ridiculous that deal last year sounds. The Texans fell for that fools gold and lost some major cash because of it. Not sure how anyone can in hindsight be mad because our FO had the same reservations and decided to take a wait and see approach.

Because they were penny wise and pound foolish.


Everyone said Kirk is not worth $20M a year, and yet we paid him $20M
Now you are all screaming no way is he worth $24M a year, and yet what are we paying him???

Smart move would have been to sign him long term (Which would have cost us the $44M we are already into him for) And IF he failed... guess what, we would have been able to get out of the deal by next off season any way.

Right now, if we are stuck tagging him again, we will have in effect paid him $24M a year, unless we franchise tag him, then it goes up to $26M.


Bottom line, unless you expect Kirk to fail, its stupid to keep playing this tag him because we need to see more game.

 

[deanpet21]

Again, how is it the smart move now though??

If Kirk succeeds his price goes up.
If he stays about where he is, we have to decide to either pay his price any way, or go into the draft.


Let me ask you, barring a rash of injuries, where do you think this team finishes?? If you say anything more than 8 wins, then drafting a rookie is likely out of the question. Because 8 wins means either trading up for a QB, or standing pat and taking one of the 2nd tier QBs and likely over drafting him because we are now desperate again.

I think we will have a good year. If we do have a playoff year and win one playoff game Danny is going to pay him regardless. So its a moot point. If he has a bad year that is what we have to look at. Look at what the Chiefs did in the draft. They were a playoff team and traded up to #10 overall and it only cost them a 1st in 2018. That's nothing. So if worst comes to worst and we lose KC to a ridiculous deal from another team we can get a top QB in the 2018 draft by just giving up a 1st in 2019.

 

[deanpet21]

Because they were penny wise and pound foolish.


Everyone said Kirk is not worth $20M a year, and yet we paid him $20M
Now you are all screaming no way is he worth $24M a year, and yet what are we paying him???

Smart move would have been to sign him long term (Which would have cost us the $44M we are already into him for) And IF he failed... guess what, we would have been able to get out of the deal by next off season any way.

Right now, if we are stuck tagging him again, we will have in effect paid him $24M a year, unless we franchise tag him, then it goes up to $26M.


Bottom line, unless you expect Kirk to fail, its stupid to keep playing this tag him because we need to see more game.

You are playing Monday Morning QB here. 44mg for 1 good year is a steep price to pay just like vtsparks said. Now in present day if KC performs he will get the LTD he wants. Plain and simple. If he fails that is where a lot of scineros come into play.

 

[Sharkinva]

I think we will have a good year. If we do have a playoff year and win one playoff game Danny is going to pay him regardless. So its a moot point. If he has a bad year that is what we have to look at. Look at what the Chiefs did in the draft. They were a playoff team and traded up to #10 overall and it only cost them a 1st in 2018. That's nothing. So if worst comes to worst and we lose KC to a ridiculous deal from another team we can get a top QB in the 2018 draft by just giving up a 1st in 2019.

The Chiefs also already have a franchise QB under contract through 2018. So they wont be forcing the rookie they just drafted to start.

Do you honestly think, if we trade up to take a QB, he will get to play sit and learn??

 

[Sharkinva]

You are playing Monday Morning QB here. 44mg for 1 good year is a steep price to pay just like vtsparks said. Now in present day if KC performs he will get the LTD he wants. Plain and simple. If he fails that is where a lot of scineros come into play.

So basically you either expect him to fail, or more likely hope he does. And if by some chance he does succeed, well you will reserve the right to still bitch that we over paid him. Sound about right??

 

[deanpet21]

So basically you either expect him to fail, or more likely hope he does. And if by some chance he does succeed, well you will reserve the right to still bitch that we over paid him. Sound about right??

Not at all. I expect KC to have a good year and make the playoffs. I just don't see your fear in losing him. If that happens we will not lose him. Im not a KC hater by no means. I don't understand why you guys can get this.

 

[deanpet21]

The Chiefs also already have a franchise QB under contract through 2018. So they wont be forcing the rookie they just drafted to start.

Do you honestly think, if we trade up to take a QB, he will get to play sit and learn??

McCoy could play a year but if we take a guy like Donald or Allen they will probably play right away. My point is the cost of moving up all those spots was minimal. There should be 3 top 10 QB's in next years draft that should have higher grades than this years three rookie qb's.

 

[gkekoa]

Sm said he doenst make deals off the franchise tag numbers.

Check your grammar and proofread your posts.

 

[gkekoa]

I think we will have a good year. If we do have a playoff year and win one playoff game Danny is going to pay him regardless. So its a moot point. If he has a bad year that is what we have to look at. Look at what the Chiefs did in the draft. They were a playoff team and traded up to #10 overall and it only cost them a 1st in 2018. That's nothing. So if worst comes to worst and we lose KC to a ridiculous deal from another team we can get a top QB in the 2018 draft by just giving up a 1st in 2019.

It isn't a moot point. If we had paid him before 2016, we would have him under contract for 19 million a season. We would likely save 10 million in cap dollars...even more if he waits until next season to sign.

Giving up a 1st rounder is a steep price. Think about that for a second. And you don't factor in the success rate.

 

[gkekoa]

You are playing Monday Morning QB here. 44mg for 1 good year is a steep price to pay just like vtsparks said. Now in present day if KC performs he will get the LTD he wants. Plain and simple. If he fails that is where a lot of scineros come into play.

It is a steep price to pay; however, it is what he made anyways over the last two seasons...and we don't have any rights to him. To get those rights, we will have paid him over 100 million dollars.

 

[deanpet21]

It isn't a moot point. If we had paid him before 2016, we would have him under contract for 19 million a season. We would likely save 10 million in cap dollars...even more if he waits until next season to sign.

Giving up a 1st rounder is a steep price. Think about that for a second. And you don't factor in the success rate.

Im not commenting on your first sentence. already explained it. Moving from mid to late 20's and going to #10 to get a QB for a 1st rounder is not a steep price at all.

 

[deanpet21]

It is a steep price to pay; however, it is what he made anyways over the last two seasons...and we don't have any rights to him. To get those rights, we will have paid him over 100 million dollars.

We have rights to KC on the transition tag. IF he succeeds this year we will not lose him unless he wants crazy numbers. Simple as that.

 

[Sharkinva]

Im not commenting on your first sentence. already explained it. Moving from mid to late 20's and going to #10 to get a QB for a 1st rounder is not a steep price at all.

In what world?? The Chiefs just gave up two potential starters for a guy they dont even expect to put on the field for the next two years.

Think about that for a moment. Unless this guy is ELITE and beats out Smith for the starting job, he will not take a snap this year. And even if the plan is to start him in 2018, that means they basically gave up a potential starter next year, and he sat the pine this year.

And this is all assuming that we might actually be able to ONLY trade up into the top ten for a single first rounder next year.

 

[deanpet21]

In what world?? The Chiefs just gave up two potential starters for a guy they dont even expect to put on the field for the next two years.

Think about that for a moment. Unless this guy is ELITE and beats out Smith for the starting job, he will not take a snap this year. And even if the plan is to start him in 2018, that means they basically gave up a potential starter next year, and he sat the pine this year.

And this is all assuming that we might actually be able to ONLY trade up into the top ten for a single first rounder next year.

Its all speculation on when he plays. The Chiefs moved up farther than the Eagles and Rams did for there QB's and gave up a lot less. Moving up 17 spots for a qb and only costing a 1st next year is a deal in my book. Buffalo should of gotten more.

 

[skinsdad62]

Check your grammar and proofread your posts.

pot calling kettle black again dean ?