Stafford 92mg and 27m per season

[countryroads316]

Really only 2 options that will work out for us
1. Kirk Cousins Wins a Playoff Game and gets the Long Term Deal
2. We suck and we draft Josh Allen

 

[Sharkinva]

Really only 2 options that will work out for us
1. Kirk Cousins Wins a Playoff Game and gets the Long Term Deal
2. We suck and we draft Josh Allen

Again I will ask.. So what if Kirk has another 4000+ yard season with between 28-35 TDs... but the defense still sucks and we once again finish 8-8. At that point drafting the golden child will cost us a trade up. Sorry I can never hope for the team to suck. And honestly if we finish poorly enough to draft Allen, Darnold or whom ever your new savior is without trading up... it means we had alot more problems than just the QB.

Did we learn nothing from 2012??

 

[j_y19]

If you're okay with 9 win seasons that's fine. I am not. Especially if my QB is getting overpaid.

Last year might of been a fluke, but he's still more successful than Cousins.

I did my research on Brady, maybe you should check on that. 24th in total yards allowed, 24th in passing yards allowed, 21st in rushing yards per attempt, 22nd in drives ending in a score. It wasn't good.\

Winning football games does factor into how much you SHOULD be paid. So SHOULD individual play. But if you are throwing for 5,000 yards every season but you can barely make the playoffs, I'd be looking for a change.

That's a horrible justification and defense of Kirk Cousins. That's like saying "well Dak Prescott is first among all active QBs in winning percentage." It's an unfair argument.

But if you are throwing for 5,000 yards every season but you can barely make the playoffs, I'd be looking for a change.

you're right. There should be change. So you solution is to dump the one aspect of your team that is actually working. A guy that throws for 5000 yards. Brilliant.

 

[Stymietee]

• 
  Overpaid quarterbacks are breaking the NFL salary cap
  For The Win

 

[Yo Tee]

But if you are throwing for 5,000 yards every season but you can barely make the playoffs, I'd be looking for a change.

you're right. There should be change. So you solution is to dump the one aspect of your team that is actually working. A guy that throws for 5000 yards. Brilliant.

My solution is to do something different because what's been going on the last two years hasn't done shit. Here's my conversation with Kirk Cousins if I'm in contract negotiations with him:

"Yeah, you've led us to become a .500 team now. Congrats. But how bout trying to make the playoffs on a consistent basis and win some playoff games. So, here's the offer. 4 years $72 mil. Each year you make the playoffs, you get a bonus. Every playoff win, you get another bonus. Every division title, you get a bonus. If you miss the playoffs or we have a losing record two years in a row, we have the option to go our separate ways."

Is that contract realistic? Hell no, but I believe vet contracts should be 100% performance based because look at the contract the Texans gave Brock Osweiler. Now they are stuck with that jail sentence of a contract because he happened to play OKAY replacing Peyton Manning and his potential went through the roof.

 

[gkekoa]

My solution is to do something different because what's been going on the last two years hasn't done shit. Here's my conversation with Kirk Cousins if I'm in contract negotiations with him:

"Yeah, you've led us to become a .500 team now. Congrats. But how bout trying to make the playoffs on a consistent basis and win some playoff games. So, here's the offer. 4 years $72 mil. Each year you make the playoffs, you get a bonus. Every playoff win, you get another bonus. Every division title, you get a bonus. If you miss the playoffs or we have a losing record two years in a row, we have the option to go our separate ways."

Is that contract realistic? Hell no, but I believe vet contracts should be 100% performance based because look at the contract the Texans gave Brock Osweiler. Now they are stuck with that jail sentence of a contract because he happened to play OKAY replacing Peyton Manning and his potential went through the roof.

In 2013, we had three wins. In 2014, we had 4 wins.

We tried something different and gave KC a shot in 2015. We won 9 games and the division. In 2016, we should have won 10 games, or I should say we had 10 games won, but our defense blew a 92% chance at a win in 65 seconds and our kicker blew a 95% chance at a win. Find another team in football history that did that.

Now let me give you this perspective. After trading for RG3, we didn't have a first round pick until the 2015 season, and we chose Scherff. Then in 2016, we chose Doctson who hasn't really seen the field. A first rounder gives the most impact, most potential, greatest chance of success, and the contract last for five years. So over the last five years, we have been playing with four fewer impact players than Every team in the NFL because we traded three away and one was hurt.

Here would be Cousin's response. "OK. I will be signing with SF. Thank you."

 

[j_y19]

My solution is to do something different because what's been going on the last two years hasn't done shit. Here's my conversation with Kirk Cousins if I'm in contract negotiations with him:

"Yeah, you've led us to become a .500 team now. Congrats. But how bout trying to make the playoffs on a consistent basis and win some playoff games. So, here's the offer. 4 years $72 mil. Each year you make the playoffs, you get a bonus. Every playoff win, you get another bonus. Every division title, you get a bonus. If you miss the playoffs or we have a losing record two years in a row, we have the option to go our separate ways."

Is that contract realistic? Hell no, but I believe vet contracts should be 100% performance based because look at the contract the Texans gave Brock Osweiler. Now they are stuck with that jail sentence of a contract because he happened to play OKAY replacing Peyton Manning and his potential went through the roof.

See, here is where you don't understand what has been holding this team back the last 2 years. You seem to place the entire blame for this franchise not being a 10-6 or greater team all on KC. You fail to understand that we had a historically bad defense who couldn't stop any team from marching down the field and converting 3rd downs with regularity from any distance. We also had no real running game to speak of. So any success we have had since KC has been our starter (and we have seen significant growth in success in his 2 years) has all been because we could pass with success on almost all defenses. So we have an aspect of our team that is one of the tops in the league, and that is our passing game. This is an unarguable fact. You solution is to walk away from that one thing we have working with no replacement in the fold. How does that make any sense? The reasons why this team has not made larger strides yet (and, again, they have improved under the 2 short years KC has been behind center as the starter) has less to do with KC and more to do with the lack of defense we have had. IF you followed this team regularly, you would understand this.

I also saw in one of your posts that one if his weaknesses is he is not a leader.......where the hell are you getting your info???? Are you just making shit up now? First, this is completely counter to what his teammates say. Most recently, Trent Williams (you may know who he is???) said that it is clear who the captain is on this team when discussing KC. He is not alone is such statements. Also, are you aware that KC was voted by his teammates at MSU as a captain as a sophomore and he wasn't even a starter yet? Does that not tell you something about his leadership qualities??

 

[Yo Tee]

See, here is where you don't understand what has been holding this team back the last 2 years. You seem to place the entire blame for this franchise not being a 10-6 or greater team all on KC. You fail to understand that we had a historically bad defense who couldn't stop any team from marching down the field and converting 3rd downs with regularity from any distance. We also had no real running game to speak of. So any success we have had since KC has been our starter (and we have seen significant growth in success in his 2 years) has all been because we could pass with success on almost all defenses. So we have an aspect of our team that is one of the tops in the league, and that is our passing game. This is an unarguable fact. You solution is to walk away from that one thing we have working with no replacement in the fold. How does that make any sense? The reasons why this team has not made larger strides yet (and, again, they have improved under the 2 short years KC has been behind center as the starter) has less to do with KC and more to do with the lack of defense we have had. IF you followed this team regularly, you would understand this.

I also saw in one of your posts that one if his weaknesses is he is not a leader.......where the hell are you getting your info???? Are you just making shit up now? First, this is completely counter to what his teammates say. Most recently, Trent Williams (you may know who he is???) said that it is clear who the captain is on this team when discussing KC. He is not alone is such statements. Also, are you aware that KC was voted by his teammates at MSU as a captain as a sophomore and he wasn't even a starter yet? Does that not tell you something about his leadership qualities??

Like I've said, if you're okay with a .500 team then that's fine. More power to you. I'd like to think Redskins fans have loftier goals than .500, barely making the playoffs.

 

[j_y19]

Like I've said, if you're okay with a .500 team then that's fine. More power to you. I'd like to think Redskins fans have loftier goals than .500, barely making the playoffs.

And like others have said, you have no clue as to what is making this team a PLUS .500 team the last 2 years. It isn't the guy behind center that is holding us back from January play. IF you can't see that this is a team that went from a 4-12 team to a ABOVE .500 team the last 2 years, and why, then you might want to stick to talking about what is holding up your team from being anything more than couch potatoes also in January. IF you can actually do that, which is suspect, given your misguided analysis of our team.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

And like others have said, you have no clue as to what is making this team a PLUS .500 team the last 2 years. It isn't the guy behind center that is holding us back from January play. IF you can't see that this is a team that went from a 4-12 team to a ABOVE .500 team the last 2 years, and why, then you might want to stick to talking about what is holding up your team from being anything more than couch potatoes also in January. IF you can actually do that, which is suspect, given your misguided analysis of our team.

Yep - how about taking it a little further. Trade Cousins for Big Ben last season. Does anyone honestly believe that the records for the two teams would basically be the same? No way in hell. There is much more to an NFL team then a QB. Also - again - any money not spent on Cousins does not automatically parlay into an influx of talent for the remaining roster. The Redskins are fine salary cap wise & building a team is much more about making the rt decisions & getting younger & not about throwing $$ at the problem.

 

[skinsdad62]

here is my thing about wins . sonny jurgensen was a HOF qb . he had a losing record as a starter for the skins

jim plunket won 2 superbowls and had a career 72 -72 record

trent dilfer won a superbowl and had a 58-55 record barely above 500

3 of 4 seasons Drew brees has been 7-9 , does that mean he sucks ?

the idea that winning is on the qb soley is foolish and not very informed as a football fan

now KC was a part of a team that before he was a starter won 7 games in 2 seasons since then they have won 17.

if you follow this team you would know that we have had historically awful defenses

the talent was awful and we had cap issues/lack of draft picks do to bad trades

we are a 500 team because of the talent assembled prior to this up coming season . hopefully we added some defense to help us out and we can make a jump to maybe a playoff win . or at least an appearance

i still feel that we are another good draft away from being a consistent winner

but the nonsense that we are forever doomed to 500 because KC is the qb is just micro hate

is KC worth being the top paid player in the NFL ? no he is not based on talent, however he is a top 75 player, and supply and demand means it could take 24-27 mil to get him , wouldnt doubt 30 to 35 mil , but all that falls on the shortsighted FO

 

[j_y19]

here is my thing about wins . sonny jurgensen was a HOF qb . he had a losing record as a starter for the skins

jim plunket won 2 superbowls and had a career 72 -72 record

trent dilfer won a superbowl and had a 58-55 record barely above 500

3 of 4 seasons Drew brees has been 7-9 , does that mean he sucks ?

the idea that winning is on the qb soley is foolish and not very informed as a football fan

now KC was a part of a team that before he was a starter won 7 games in 2 seasons since then they have won 17.

if you follow this team you would know that we have had historically awful defenses

the talent was awful and we had cap issues/lack of draft picks do to bad trades

we are a 500 team because of the talent assembled prior to this up coming season . hopefully we added some defense to help us out and we can make a jump to maybe a playoff win . or at least an appearance

i still feel that we are another good draft away from being a consistent winner

but the nonsense that we are forever doomed to 500 because KC is the qb is just micro hate

is KC worth being the top paid player in the NFL ? no he is not based on talent, however he is a top 75 player, and supply and demand means it could take 24-27 mil to get him , wouldnt doubt 30 to 35 mil , but all that falls on the shortsighted FO

the idea that winning is on the qb soley is foolish and not very informed as a football fan

Bingo. Those that use this stat only as an evaluation on KC are just ABCers.

but the nonsense that we are forever doomed to 500 because KC is the qb is just micro hate

Any one that proclaims this is just plain ignorant or just trolling. In this guy's case, maybe both.

 

[Breed]

Tom Brady's first super bowl team's defense was ranked 24th overall in the league. It is possible to have a shit defense and win a Super Bowl.

This ^^^^ leads me to believe you didn't see that Super Bowl for whatever reason. If you had, you wouldn't say something as blatantly off-base as the above statement. I'd even opine that New England's defense was a far bigger factor in NE winning that game than Brady.

And if you're using stats as your biggest argument for the opinion you presently hold for that game. I'd opine using the game stats from that game as opposed to stats from that entire season. Would serve you better.

Stats while useful and not a bad thing to have a grasp of. Aren't always the end all, be all to to a discussion and can at times. Instead of bringing clarity to a subject. They merely make it more murky.

For instance

In 2001 the Redskins defense stat-wise was the 10th best defense in football allowing 302.9 yards per game. The Pats, as you mentioned, were 24th in that category allowing 334.5 yards per game.

In points allowed in 2001 the Skins gave up 18.9 pt per game, good for 13th best in football.
In points allowed in 2001 the Pats gave up 17.0 pt per game, good for 6th best in football.

Now from the stats above. Which defense would you prefer. Its a no-brainer to me.

 

[Breed]

but the nonsense that we are forever doomed to 500 because KC is the qb is just micro hate

What's micro hate? I don't want anyone assigning me the incorrect type or amount of hate I'm supposed to have. Because I don't think Kirk Cousins is worth 25 mill per.

 

[skinsdad62]

What's micro hate? I don't want anyone assigning me the incorrect type or amount of hate I'm supposed to have. Because I don't think Kirk Cousins is worth 25 mill per.

well you have micro aggression now so my new catch phrase is micro hate and then macro hate

see you at the patent office

 

[Breed]

well you have micro aggression now so my new catch phrase is micro hate and then macro hate

see you at the patent office

Word. I wish you luck with the patent, homey. But if you don't have it before you start using your new catchphrase. You could very well lose out.

Who do you think came up with butt-hurt? That's right, yours truly. And when I saw it catching on, down to the patent office I went. Only to discover that within a week of using the word on the internet. 96 patents had already been filed for ownership of butt-hurt and I don't recall filing or signing not one damn one of em. When I told them I was the one who came up with butt-hurt, that it was my idea. They said I could take it up with the Complaint Dept down the hall and to the right. So I went there and made an appt. My appt is for Sept 3rd, 2057 or 58. Give or take a few million deaths including, but not limited to my own.

Get your patent now, man, is all I'm saying.

 

[skinsdad62]

Word. I wish you luck with the patent, homey. But if you don't have it before you start using your new catchphrase. You could very well lose out.

Who do you think came up with butt-hurt? That's right, yours truly. And when I saw it catching on, down to the patent office I went. Only to discover that within a week of using the word on the internet. 96 patents had already been filed for ownership of butt-hurt and I don't recall filing or signing not one damn one of em. When I told them I was the one who came up with butt-hurt, that it was my idea. They said I could take it up with the Complaint Dept down the hall and to the right. So I went there and made an appt. My appt is for Sept 3rd, 2057 or 58. Give or take a few million deaths including, but not limited to my own.

Get your patent now, man, is all I'm saying.

thanks for the tip buddy hopefully they can squeeze me in at about 2037

 

[j_y19]

Word. I wish you luck with the patent, homey. But if you don't have it before you start using your new catchphrase. You could very well lose out.

Who do you think came up with butt-hurt? That's right, yours truly. And when I saw it catching on, down to the patent office I went. Only to discover that within a week of using the word on the internet. 96 patents had already been filed for ownership of butt-hurt and I don't recall filing or signing not one damn one of em. When I told them I was the one who came up with butt-hurt, that it was my idea. They said I could take it up with the Complaint Dept down the hall and to the right. So I went there and made an appt. My appt is for Sept 3rd, 2057 or 58. Give or take a few million deaths including, but not limited to my own.

Get your patent now, man, is all I'm saying.

That sucks. I bet you were butt-hurt......

 

[gkekoa]

This ^^^^ leads me to believe you didn't see that Super Bowl for whatever reason. If you had, you wouldn't say something as blatantly off-base as the above statement. I'd even opine that New England's defense was a far bigger factor in NE winning that game than Brady.

And if you're using stats as your biggest argument for the opinion you presently hold for that game. I'd opine using the game stats from that game as opposed to stats from that entire season. Would serve you better.

Stats while useful and not a bad thing to have a grasp of. Aren't always the end all, be all to to a discussion and can at times. Instead of bringing clarity to a subject. They merely make it more murky.

For instance

In 2001 the Redskins defense stat-wise was the 10th best defense in football allowing 302.9 yards per game. The Pats, as you mentioned, were 24th in that category allowing 334.5 yards per game.

In points allowed in 2001 the Skins gave up 18.9 pt per game, good for 13th best in football.
In points allowed in 2001 the Pats gave up 17.0 pt per game, good for 6th best in football.

Now from the stats above. Which defense would you prefer. Its a no-brainer to me.

Take it a step further...even in the regular season, NE was 6 in scoring defense at 17.0 PPG. But good point...

2001 postseason- 13, 17, 17 in three games.

2003 postseason- 14, 14, 29

2004- 3, 27, 21

2014- 31, 7, 24

2016- 16, 17, 28


Take it a step further.

2001- NE only scored 16 points in an OT game to beat Oakland after a tuck rule and a 45 yard Vinatieri snow FG to send it to OT. STL only scores 17 as the greatest show on turf. NE wins by only three. A Cinatieri 48 yarder wins it as time expires. If either game doesn't go perfectly and the Ne defense isn't fantastic, Brady doesn't win his first.

2003- NE only manages 17 with a game winner by Vinatieri from 46.

And then there is 2016. The defense won that game for NE by not giving up another point after being down 28, 7 of which were Brady caused. The defense knocked Atlanta out of FG range twice. People will remember Brady in that game but they should be talking defense.

 

[SteelersPride]

wiht the cap going up who cares if its a big contract, hes a franchise qb