Redskins are considering tagging Kirk for a trade

[chillerdab]

So wait.. you would be OK with tieing up every drop of cap space just to TRY and get a 2nd round pick for a QB you dont even want here. And if he doesnt play ball you would forsake ANY chance of improving this team in order to sabotage his chances of going some place that wants him??

But its just business.... RIGHTTTT

Dude (edit).... No. I've said on more than one occasion that I wanted KC to be here. Just because YOU are a one trick pony - all doom-and-gloom ALL. THE. TIME. - doesn't mean we all are.

The front office screwed it up. KC played the tags perfectly, and played the redskins management for the fools that they are. I ain't mad at KC.

I also ain't mad at Bruce Allen IF he has a plan in place to recoup some of the draft capital he stupidly spent on Alex Fucking Smith.

Since there is literally no reason for KC to NOT sign the tender, all it would take is for Bruce Allen to put down his Tom Collins, or whatever the fuck stupid old white men drink, and work the phones for a minute.

Either KC is "the best qb to hit the market since Drew Brees" and thus LIKELY to have multiple suitors who would make a deal for his exclusive negotiating rights, or he is not.

So, to answer your dumb question - Yes. Because there's either a market for him or there's not.
And Yes. It's a business decision.

 

[Sharkinva]

Dude (edit).... No. I've said on more than one occasion that I wanted KC to be here. Just because YOU are a one trick pony - all doom-and-gloom ALL. THE. TIME. - doesn't mean we all are.

The front office screwed it up. KC played the tags perfectly, and played the redskins management for the fools that they are. I ain't mad at KC.

I also ain't mad at Bruce Allen IF he has a plan in place to recoup some of the draft capital he stupidly spent on Alex Fucking Smith.

Since there is literally no reason for KC to NOT sign the tender, all it would take is for Bruce Allen to put down his Tom Collins, or whatever the fuck stupid old white men drink, and work the phones for a minute.

Either KC is "the best qb to hit the market since Drew Brees" and thus LIKELY to have multiple suitors who would make a deal for his exclusive negotiating rights, or he is not.

So, to answer your dumb question - Yes. Because there's either a market for him or there's not.
And Yes. It's a business decision.

OK my bad, maybe the YOU was a bit too personal.

But reality is, tagging Cousins at the risk of

1. forfeiting the comp pick
2. Maintaining a posture that if he doesnt sign we can just hold him until he has no place to go then rescind the tag
3. Being willing to NOT sign not only our own free agents, but any possible outside free agents in order to hold Cousins rights

None of that is business, its purely personal at that point.

Going after Smith, might have been business. Not telling Kirk and letting him find out via social Media might have just been an over sight. But risking improving the team in some vain attempt to get something back for a QB Bruce clearly didnt want... that aint good business, thats personal.

And once again there is no logical reason for Cousins to sign the tag, because he knows that holding his rights would be akin to Bruce cutting off his nose to spite his face.

 

[gkekoa]

Dude (edit).... No. I've said on more than one occasion that I wanted KC to be here. Just because YOU are a one trick pony - all doom-and-gloom ALL. THE. TIME. - doesn't mean we all are.

The front office screwed it up. KC played the tags perfectly, and played the redskins management for the fools that they are. I ain't mad at KC.

I also ain't mad at Bruce Allen IF he has a plan in place to recoup some of the draft capital he stupidly spent on Alex Fucking Smith.

Since there is literally no reason for KC to NOT sign the tender, all it would take is for Bruce Allen to put down his Tom Collins, or whatever the fuck stupid old white men drink, and work the phones for a minute.

Either KC is "the best qb to hit the market since Drew Brees" and thus LIKELY to have multiple suitors who would make a deal for his exclusive negotiating rights, or he is not.

So, to answer your dumb question - Yes. Because there's either a market for him or there's not.
And Yes. It's a business decision.

KC is the best QB since Brees to hit the market.

No team is going to pay KC 35million and give up draft picks for this upcoming season just to talk to him. Nobody would do that Drew Brees either.

We won’t end up tagging KC though...because not even Bruce Allen can be that stupid.

 

[Sharkinva]

@chillerdab I will throw you a bone here though... there is one way Bruce could make it work and Force Cousins to play ball.

All it would take is going to Norman, Williams, Kerrigan, Reed and Moses... asking them all to restructure with minimal new money in order to make cap space enough for them to hold Cousins and force him to sign the tender.

But that would require him to ask key Redskins to assist in him getting his way, and then not expect him to possibly later pull the same bull shit on them.

 

[Stymietee]

You guys must have known that I would do the necessary research, sooo, This is what you all are referring to that relates to signing a FT tender/ designation. Section 2 covers both Nonexclusive Franchise Tender and the Exclusive Franchise Tender.


(c) If a player subject to a Franchise Player designation accepts the Required Tender, the resulting Player Contract shall be fully guaranteed if the player’s contract is terminated because of lack of comparative skill; as a result of an injury sustained in the performance of his services under his Player Contract; and/or due to a Club’s determination to create Room for Salary Cap purposes. For purposes of this Subsection only, any contract termination due to the failure of the player to establish or maintain his excellent physical condition will be subject to review of a neutral physician appointed by the parties, whose physical findings will be conclusive in any arbitration proceeding relating to the physical condition of the player at the time of the exam, provided that such exam takes place within twenty (20) days of the contract termination.

(d) Any of the Required Tenders set forth in this Section 2 may be withdrawn at any time, but if such Tender is withdrawn, the player immediately becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent and thereafter is completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with any Club, and any Club shall be completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with any such player, without any penalty or restriction, including, but not limited to, Draft Choice Compensation between Clubs or First Refusal Rights of any kind, or any signing period.

....And here's the section that covers, Section 3. Transition Player Designations:

(a) Any Club that designates a Transition Player shall be deemed on the first day of the League Year following the expiration of the player’s last contract to have automatically tendered the player a one year NFL Player Contract for (A) the Cap Percentage Average of the ten largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) at which the Transition Player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year, which Average shall be calculated using the methodology as in Section 2(a)(i)(A) above; or (B) 120% of his Prior Year Salary, whichever is greater. The Tender may be withdrawn at any time, but if such Tender is withdrawn, the player immediately becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent and thereafter is completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with any Club, and any Club shall be completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with such player, without any penalty or restriction, including, but not limited to, Draft Choice Compensation between Clubs or First Refusal Rights of any kind, or any signing period. For purposes of this Subsection, the “Transition Tag” for any League Year is the average of the ten largest Prior Year Salaries for players at that position (e.g., the Transition Tag for the 2010 League Year equals the average of the ten largest Salaries for the 2009 League Year for players at that position).


BTW: Here's the link to the CBA. If any of you who are still claiming that once the tag is signed it cannot be withdrawn can find anything that covers it, please do and repost it.

[PDF]
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT - Microsoft
https://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/PDFs/2011 CBA...

 

[Stymietee]

I dont know if the people are adorable.

But by asking this question are you asking for a list just to see if you are included??

YOu and i both know that there were people on this forum pounding the boards that we needed to move on from COusins, that finding a new better QB would be significantly cheaper and not too difficult. And by and large that same group of people are defending the idea of we should now tag Cousins and try to trade him because we need to get something back for him.

And by and large that same group of people are defending the idea of we should now tag Cousins and try to trade him because we need to get something back for him.

To put the sentiment in relationship terms (because we do that around here from time to time)

It would be like having your live in for the last three years find out over face book that you moved on, gave the new person the ring and commitment you refused to give your live in. Then showing up three days later and saying, I know its over between us.... but let me hit it one more time and pick your next partner for you from a group of people I like.

Honestly, I have no problem with designating who or which group supports this or that in these discussions. Where I do have issue with all of this foolishness is compacting everyone exclusively into a one or the other category. BTW: No I'm not asking for a list to see if I'm included, that's being done because there are in the imagination of some, a one way or the other scenario. In fact, your response here (above) does exactly that when you lump "moving on from Cousins" with "finding a new better QB would be significantly cheaper and not too difficult" as if these two positions were not stand alone topics. For good measure, as if that were not enough, you've injected yet another separate topic when you again suggest, in group think, "that same group of people are defending the idea of we should now tag Cousins and try to trade him because we need to get something back for him." Then finally, cementing this either/ or camp think with a really nice homily, with a thematic base of.....either/or as if there's no room for, something other than two choices, positions, or train of thought.

 

[Stymietee]

OK my bad, maybe the YOU was a bit too personal.

But reality is, tagging Cousins at the risk of

1. forfeiting the comp pick
2. Maintaining a posture that if he doesnt sign we can just hold him until he has no place to go then rescind the tag
3. Being willing to NOT sign not only our own free agents, but any possible outside free agents in order to hold Cousins rights

None of that is business, its purely personal at that point.

Going after Smith, might have been business. Not telling Kirk and letting him find out via social Media might have just been an over sight. But risking improving the team in some vain attempt to get something back for a QB Bruce clearly didnt want... that aint good business, thats personal.

And once again there is no logical reason for Cousins to sign the tag, because he knows that holding his rights would be akin to Bruce cutting off his nose to spite his face.

Let's say you're right and it's personal, a real swinging dick, good ole' boy pissing contest, wouldn't you need to have at minimum two participants? Even in a one way event, maintaining a professional stance by one or the other renders that professional to doing what's in his or the team's best interest, right? If that's true, then Kirk has a number of reasons to sign the tag as it settles upon the table and not a moment after. That would not be personal, but damn good business! Not signing it would be personal and by all accounts, nothing that we've seen in Cousins.

BTW: if he's truly butt hurt and "feels" as if he needs to bitch down with Bruce, there will be no winners in sinking to gutter sniping. The end result of that skirmish becomes Bruce confirming what a lot of us know him to be and he literally destroys the team's future in the process, and Kirk, becomes a pariah to future suitors and destroys his "good guy" "team player" persona forever.

For more on what Kirk risks in getting into that cesspool with Bruce, let's think back to the 36 million cap hit, Colin Kaepernick, Terrell Owens, and a whole host of former players, fairly or unfairly, who found themselves on the wrong end of the owners ire. Unproven Collusion charges mean nothing to them, except that the offender is ass out.

 

[gkekoa]

You guys must have known that I would do the necessary research, sooo, This is what you all are referring to that relates to signing a FT tender/ designation. Section 2 covers both Nonexclusive Franchise Tender and the Exclusive Franchise Tender.


(c) If a player subject to a Franchise Player designation accepts the Required Tender, the resulting Player Contract shall be fully guaranteed if the player’s contract is terminated because of lack of comparative skill; as a result of an injury sustained in the performance of his services under his Player Contract; and/or due to a Club’s determination to create Room for Salary Cap purposes. For purposes of this Subsection only, any contract termination due to the failure of the player to establish or maintain his excellent physical condition will be subject to review of a neutral physician appointed by the parties, whose physical findings will be conclusive in any arbitration proceeding relating to the physical condition of the player at the time of the exam, provided that such exam takes place within twenty (20) days of the contract termination.

(d) Any of the Required Tenders set forth in this Section 2 may be withdrawn at any time, but if such Tender is withdrawn, the player immediately becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent and thereafter is completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with any Club, and any Club shall be completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with any such player, without any penalty or restriction, including, but not limited to, Draft Choice Compensation between Clubs or First Refusal Rights of any kind, or any signing period.

....And here's the section that covers, Section 3. Transition Player Designations:

(a) Any Club that designates a Transition Player shall be deemed on the first day of the League Year following the expiration of the player’s last contract to have automatically tendered the player a one year NFL Player Contract for (A) the Cap Percentage Average of the ten largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) at which the Transition Player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year, which Average shall be calculated using the methodology as in Section 2(a)(i)(A) above; or (B) 120% of his Prior Year Salary, whichever is greater. The Tender may be withdrawn at any time, but if such Tender is withdrawn, the player immediately becomes an Unrestricted Free Agent and thereafter is completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with any Club, and any Club shall be completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with such player, without any penalty or restriction, including, but not limited to, Draft Choice Compensation between Clubs or First Refusal Rights of any kind, or any signing period. For purposes of this Subsection, the “Transition Tag” for any League Year is the average of the ten largest Prior Year Salaries for players at that position (e.g., the Transition Tag for the 2010 League Year equals the average of the ten largest Salaries for the 2009 League Year for players at that position).


BTW: Here's the link to the CBA. If any of you who are still claiming that once the tag is signed it cannot be withdrawn can find anything that covers it, please do and repost it.

[PDF]
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT - Microsoft
https://nflpaweb.blob.core.windows.net/media/Default/PDFs/2011 CBA...

Unless it has been signed. A signed tender is not a tender. It is a contract.

 

[j_y19]

Honestly, I have no problem with designating who or which group supports this or that in these discussions. Where I do have issue with all of this foolishness is compacting everyone exclusively into a one or the other category. BTW: No I'm not asking for a list to see if I'm included, that's being done because there are in the imagination of some, a one way or the other scenario. In fact, your response here (above) does exactly that when you lump "moving on from Cousins" with "finding a new better QB would be significantly cheaper and not too difficult" as if these two positions were not stand alone topics. For good measure, as if that were not enough, you've injected yet another separate topic when you again suggest, in group think, "that same group of people are defending the idea of we should now tag Cousins and try to trade him because we need to get something back for him." Then finally, cementing this either/ or camp think with a really nice homily, with a thematic base of.....either/or as if there's no room for, something other than two choices, positions, or train of thought.

I'm a perfect example of this. Its well known I was a Cousins supporter and wanted him here long term. But since we have determined by our latest actions that we are moving on, I support the team doing what ever they need to maximize our return on Cousins leaving. I also do not buy into this notion that, out of spite or a personal vendetta, that Cousins would hold out signing the tag. That just makes no sense and would not only injure our franchise, but also himself. Why would he do that? I finally don't believe that by signing the tag, that KC relinquishes all control over where he goes. In fact, he now can make the team do all of his dirty work before the tampering period is over. There is nothing stopping two teams discussing a trade before the new year starts.

Now I also recognize that there is risk is tagging KC. Just like all business decisions (which this is) there is a risk. And that risk is that we cannot work out a deal before FA starts and we are so saddled by our temporary cap situation that we miss out on FAs we want. But I view it as small and unlikely. All we are going to hope to get is something better than a 3rd round pick. We do that , and it was a good business decision. BTW, there may be a opportunity to delay the Smith signing for a SHORT period so he doesn't hit our cap while we work out the KC issue. It would behove him to help us as it ultimately helps him.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

I think that we need to take a step back & stop assuming that this is all so personal for all parties. In the end Snyder, Allen & Cousins are very rich men & in their minds they are heading in the rt direction (doesn't matter if it is accurate or what we think). No real reason in that case for any of them to be anything but happy w/ their situations.

I think that fans (including me) take a lot of this very personal (understandable), but you can't assume that those actually running the show & playing the game feel the same way. This is their everyday life & way that they earn their living - their reality is much different than ours. As they say - this is business.

Again - time to move on & I am guessing that they won't tag him & this will be in the rear view mirror soon.

 

[gkekoa]

Reason why KC may delay signing the tag...

He wants complete freedom in negotiation. Most highly sought after free agents sign in the first few days of the free agent period. If he holds out signing for a few days, he will force Allen to release him. If he feels Allen is holding on out of spite, he could sign it and refuse to accept a late trade, and become a FA next season.

 

[Niner Outlaw]

In outlaws scenario I would take the 4th . In my world I have committed to smith so I Let KC walk and get the camp pick . Then I start filling holes

Well said, and I think that is exactly what the Skins will do. There is a very realistic chance that an tag and trade KC ends up with Washington receiving less than the 3rd rd comp, so don't throw good money after bad.

 

[Sharkinva]

Look as Redskins fans, I know we all want to HOPE this is all just business. But the reality is, aside from the stakes being in the Millions instead of the Thousands most of us have seen what good business practices look like. And I would wager most of us have seen at some point where a business decision was made for personal reasons. If the teams handling of this is strictly business, its amazing that they are still in business.

 

[Niner Outlaw]

Elway is cheap as hell when it comes to giving up assets, so compensation from Denver is going to be meager, Ironically a 3rd or 4th. So if I'm GM, they would be my ICE (in case of emergency) team.

Agreed. Elway is gonna try to play hardball in any trade talks. Remember how contentious the Von Miller contract talks were (smh)? I don't really get all the love Elway from the media and others. Sure, he had 2 SB years, but both years he had Manning. In the years before and after Manning, Elway isn't nearly as good a GM. Strange, how that works eh?

BTW: I'm pretty sure that teams can rescind FT's until July 15th. ...Next, I have 18 days, let's not discount that because it is my window to get things done. To me that means that I more closely have 17 days 23 hours before I am forced to rescind that tag.

Nope. As @gkekoa said, once the tender offer is signed (accepted), it's no longer a tender, it's a fully guaranteed 1 year contract. Tenders can be rescinded, not contracts.

Under Section 2, which covers the franchise tenders:
(c) If a player subject to a Franchise Player designation accepts the Required Tender, the resulting Player Contract shall be fully guaranteed if the player’s contract is terminated because of lack of comparative skill; as a result of an injury sustained in the performance of his services under his Player Contract; and/or due to a Club’s determination to create Room for Salary Cap purposes.

Notice that it says once the tender has been accepted, it becomes a "player contract." Tenders can be rescinded at any time b/c they haven't been signed. Once the tender is signed, it becomes a contract, so the tender rescission provisions do not apply. And if you don't believe my interpretation:

When those new CBA rules hit, Florio at PFT, a labor lawyer, broke it down in layman's terms. "The amount of the franchise tender becomes fully guaranteed once the player signs it. ...The risk is that the franchise tag can be withdrawn, at any time, before it has been signed. 10 things to know about the franchise tag

"It can't be rescinded once it's signed." Everything you need to know about the NFL's 2017 franchise tag

What to know about NFL franchise tag designations

Think about it, the only franchise tenders that have been rescinded were all in cases where the player had not signed the tag. Corey Simon, Jeremiah Trotter, and Josh Norman.

One other thing, since I'm GM, there's the assumption that Bruce Allen is enjoying his new job as dead duck director at an outpost somewhere near Siberia.

With his track record, it looks like Allen was born to run the Cleveland Browns!

 

[SoCalWizFan]

Look as Redskins fans, I know we all want to HOPE this is all just business. But the reality is, aside from the stakes being in the Millions instead of the Thousands most of us have seen what good business practices look like. And I would wager most of us have seen at some point where a business decision was made for personal reasons. If the teams handling of this is strictly business, its amazing that they are still in business.

Are you kidding me? There are lots of pro sports owners who (while they may be good businesspeople in other areas) are not good sports owners. Some inherited or married into the team or simply had the cash & connections to buy a team & then simply benefited due to circumstances (e.g. Snyder).

Lots of these folks make tons of $$ in spite of poor decisions & while perhaps it may not usually translate into wins - for many it almost always translates into more $$. Such is life.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

If you want the ultimate example look at Donald Sterling. Was not a good at running an NBA team, his organization made lots of bad choices, was not a good person yet in the end walked away with the proceeds of a $2B sale of his team.

 

[Sharkinva]

@SoCalWizFan Maybe I should rephrase that then.. Snyder is not a bad business person, he is a bad owner. As such its surprising that we as a team are NOT worse on the field the we have been. And that primarily is because as an owner, Snyder has treated the team as if it were fantasy football more often than not.

But as you said... such is life

 

[Rowdy]

My take on all this is, if he is tagged all parties have already agreed to something previously

 

[SoCalWizFan]

@SoCalWizFan Maybe I should rephrase that then.. Snyder is not a bad business person, he is a bad owner. As such its surprising that we as a team are NOT worse on the field the we have been. And that primarily is because as an owner, Snyder has treated the team as if it were fantasy football more often than not.

But as you said... such is life

Agree completely but sometimes even bad ownership can translate into success. IMO Georgia Frontiere was as bad as they come yet the Rams won a SB during her tenure (granted others helped & she did not have a long reign like Snyder). We will see.

 

[Niner Outlaw]

Agree completely but sometimes even bad ownership can translate into success. IMO Georgia Frontiere was as bad as they come yet the Rams won a SB during her tenure (granted others helped & she did not have a long reign like Snyder). We will see.

Add the Yorks to that list. Bad owners without a doubt, but they still found success with Harbaugh.