Schefter Reports Contract Talks with Cousins Broken Off

[j_y19]

My question (someone please enlighten me) is what is the point of tagging him now and then working out a long term contract before we see what he has got through camp, and possibly a portion of next season? Obviously each sides magic numbers or conditions are not very close. If KC and his agent are not willing to budge because of what they feel his worth is and same goes for the FO... Why not let it all ($$$$) work itself out on the field???

That might be the outcome. It hinges on 2 things. Are they really convinced he made a permanent leap last year and is one of the next franchise QBs. If they do believe this (which I think key guys do) then sign him to a long term deal before the 9th and pay what you have to. The second point Is how does this damage their cap? They are in ok shape on the cap. But they have to free up money. If KC costs them $20m this year, then other issues will have to wait next year.

 

[Sharkinva]

My question (someone please enlighten me) is what is the point of tagging him now and then working out a long term contract before we see what he has got through camp, and possibly a portion of next season? Obviously each sides magic numbers or conditions are not very close. If KC and his agent are not willing to budge because of what they feel his worth is and same goes for the FO... Why not let it all ($$$$) work itself out on the field???

IF you tag him, you only have until JUly 15th to work out a long term deal. Camp doesnt start until august. And if he goes into camp with the tag in effect, we actually CANT work out a long term deal until next season. Wel lwe could, but it would not lower his cap cost for 2016 in any way.

So we either work out a long term deal before camp, or he plays under the tag in which case, we dont start talking long term deal until next year. Sure you might want to see what he does, but the flip side is, if he does well... his price goes way up. And if he doesnt, you spent $20 million for one year instead of a long term deal where that same $20 million could go across 2-3 seasons.

 

[Sleepy T]

I see. So it's all just a big gamble if we choose to sign him long term now. I assume that if we wait until after next season to work out a contract and he kicks ass, he is free to play the FA market and get Top $$$?? I really like Kirk, but signing him long term right now just makes me nervous as hell. Hopefully we will roll the dice and give him the $$$ and he works out. I hope the FO knows what they are doing.

If Cousins would have been playing the better part of the last couple seasons and RG3 was riding the pine during that entire time, we would definitely know what we had in KC and this wouldn't even be a topic of conversation.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

I see. So it's all just a big gamble if we choose to sign him long term now. I assume that if we wait until after next season to work out a contract and he kicks ass, he is free to play the FA market and get Top $$$?? I really like Kirk, but signing him long term right now just makes me nervous as hell. Hopefully we will roll the dice and give him the $$$ and he works out. I hope the FO knows what they are doing.

If Cousins would have been playing the better part of the last couple seasons and RG3 was riding the pine during that entire time, we would definitely know what we had in KC and this wouldn't even be a topic of conversation.

There are several issues to this & this is why this is taking time. No doubt the FO would like to have some outs down the road (ala Kaepernick) so that they can minimize the damage if Cousins should fail later. Cousins' agent also needs to be careful. They could be stuck with the franchise tag & not reach a long term deal till next year & then have Cousins fail next season. That could lower his overall long term deal.

Most likely this is all being done in good faith & in friendly manner from both sides. However - this is like a poker game that needs a little time to play out. I wouldn't believe all of the reports from ESPN. They are paid to stir up controversy so they tend to exaggerate things a bit.

 

[ehb5]

IF you tag him, you only have until JUly 15th to work out a long term deal. Camp doesnt start until august. And if he goes into camp with the tag in effect, we actually CANT work out a long term deal until next season. Wel lwe could, but it would not lower his cap cost for 2016 in any way.

So we either work out a long term deal before camp, or he plays under the tag in which case, we dont start talking long term deal until next year. Sure you might want to see what he does, but the flip side is, if he does well... his price goes way up. And if he doesnt, you spent $20 million for one year instead of a long term deal where that same $20 million could go across 2-3 seasons.

Am I wrong to think his price wouldn't go up that much though? It's already gonna be pretty high and if it does go up its probably because we have plenty of evidence that he is a franchise qb. In which case, paying him a lot shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Sharkinva]

Am I wrong to think his price wouldn't go up that much though? It's already gonna be pretty high and if it does go up its probably because we have plenty of evidence that he is a franchise qb. In which case, paying him a lot shouldn't be a problem.

Its a pick your poison situation. IF we tag him, we commit $20 million. If we sign him long term, that number likely drops by around $7 million. $7 million in cap space we could use to bolster the defense and improve the offense. If we tag him and then need to resign him next year, we likely still commit $13-15 million to him next year, and basically burned $7 million on the front end to do it. Also if we tag him now, and he is worth resigning, using the tag again becomes not an option because the tag value will likely be upwards of $35 million at that point.

 

[ehb5]

Its a pick your poison situation. IF we tag him, we commit $20 million. If we sign him long term, that number likely drops by around $7 million. $7 million in cap space we could use to bolster the defense and improve the offense. If we tag him and then need to resign him next year, we likely still commit $13-15 million to him next year, and basically burned $7 million on the front end to do it. Also if we tag him now, and he is worth resigning, using the tag again becomes not an option because the tag value will likely be upwards of $35 million at that point.

True, but I dont really mind spending that $7 mil. I don't think we're a real contender for next year so I dont think that $7 mil is really that important for 1 year. I get what you're saying that it costs us something, but I just dont think it really costs us enough to matter much.

 

[Sportster 72]

If I was Cousins I would not sign for $13 million. They were willing to sign or take a chance on Griffin for over $16 million.

Redskins have no one to blame but themselves. They strung this kid along for three years and dangled him as trade bait. He could have been signed a year ago for a very cap friendly amount.

I still think it gets done but not it is going to cost them. As I said before this is just normal negotiations.

 

[Sharkinva]

If I was Cousins I would not sign for $13 million. They were willing to sign or take a chance on Griffin for over $16 million.

Redskins have no one to blame but themselves. They strung this kid along for three years and dangled him as trade bait. He could have been signed a year ago for a very cap friendly amount.

I still think it gets done but not it is going to cost them. As I said before this is just normal negotiations.

He wont sign for $13 million. But if he signs a long term deal, you can spread the bonus out and thus you only take the hit for his base ($10 million) plus a portion of the bonus spread over the first 4-5 years of the deal.

Its more a matter of how big the cap hit is over the first 2-3 years. Instead of taking one big hit, we give him a 5 year deal with $15 million guaranteed, and the first two years his cap number comes in at below that $20 million per year number.

We tag him and it cost us $20 mill against the cap straight off the break.

 

[skinsdad62]

first off SM builds the team through the draft so needs can be fixed there

2nd Rg3 counts 16 mill toward KC's salary so the cap hit isnt huge

3rd we arent in any cap trouble anyway . we can make some cuts to free up space if needed

 

[SoCalWizFan]

If I was Cousins I would not sign for $13 million. They were willing to sign or take a chance on Griffin for over $16 million.

Redskins have no one to blame but themselves. They strung this kid along for three years and dangled him as trade bait. He could have been signed a year ago for a very cap friendly amount.

I still think it gets done but not it is going to cost them. As I said before this is just normal negotiations.

I don't think that you can blame the Redskins too much on this one. Remember - pretty much nobody viewed Cousins in this light until basically the 2nd half of this season. He didn't win one game as a starter in 2014 and was benched for McCoy midway through that season. Lots of folks (myself included) would not have minded him moving on to another team until we saw a different side of him after the Bucs game this season.

You were also talking about a different FO at the time, and until this past offseason RG3 was very much still in play. The entire scenario on this one changed dramatically after late Oct of 2015. As recently as the Jets game (a week before the Bucs game) numerous folks were ready to write off Cousins. This is one of the more dramatic transformations in the NFL (& hopefully it isn't a fluke).

 

[Sharkinva]

I don't think that you can blame the Redskins too much on this one. Remember - pretty much nobody viewed Cousins in this light until basically the 2nd half of this season. He didn't win one game as a starter in 2014 and was benched for McCoy midway through that season. Lots of folks (myself included) would not have minded him moving on to another team until we saw a different side of him after the Bucs game this season.

You were also talking about a different FO at the time, and until this past offseason RG3 was very much still in play. The entire scenario on this one changed dramatically after late Oct of 2015. As recently as the Jets game (a week before the Bucs game) numerous folks were ready to write off Cousins. This is one of the more dramatic transformations in the NFL (& hopefully it isn't a fluke).

So the question becomes.. are you really willing to forgo 2-3 players salaries over the next year or two in order to make Kirk prove it wasnt a fluke? IF so, fine. But the reality is, unless Kirk is asking for a $120 million plus type deal, you can always structure the contract where it takes care of the player, leaves the team outs AND still leaves some flex room in the next two years.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

So the question becomes.. are you really willing to forgo 2-3 players salaries over the next year or two in order to make Kirk prove it wasnt a fluke? IF so, fine. But the reality is, unless Kirk is asking for a $120 million plus type deal, you can always structure the contract where it takes care of the player, leaves the team outs AND still leaves some flex room in the next two years.

No - I am fine with that. I was simply providing clarification as to why the Redskins didn't agree to a cheaper deal in previous seasons. I am guessing that the outs that you are suggesting are one of the main sticking pts at this time.

 

[j_y19]

first off SM builds the team through the draft so needs can be fixed there

2nd Rg3 counts 16 mill toward KC's salary so the cap hit isnt huge

3rd we arent in any cap trouble anyway . we can make some cuts to free up space if needed

Sorry dad but I gotta disagree. Rg3 would have never seen that $16m even if he was playing lights out. The FO would have already renegotiated an extension to lower than cap hit in 2016. His hit would come in around that 10-12m range if he agreed to a 4-5 year extension. So we are talking about a much larger cap hit if we tag KC. Also, we are not in great shape cap wise. I'd put us middle of the pack. You have one player account for well over 50% of available cap space, that stresses everything else you would hope to do in FA. We can, and will, make some cuts to free up space, but we will have to replace everyone of those we cut so it's not a $ for $ saving. It's really best if we can sign him to a multi year deal and focus on addressing a few other holes this year.

 

[skinsdad62]

Sorry dad but I gotta disagree. Rg3 would have never seen that $16m even if he was playing lights out. The FO would have already renegotiated an extension to lower than cap hit in 2016. His hit would come in around that 10-12m range if he agreed to a 4-5 year extension. So we are talking about a much larger cap hit if we tag KC. Also, we are not in great shape cap wise. I'd put us middle of the pack. You have one player account for well over 50% of available cap space, that stresses everything else you would hope to do in FA. We can, and will, make some cuts to free up space, but we will have to replace everyone of those we cut so it's not a $ for $ saving. It's really best if we can sign him to a multi year deal and focus on addressing a few other holes this year.

i disagree 16 mil would have been committed to Rg3 if he played and made the team . when he comes off the books all you are doing is shifting who gets the pay out cut riley and you are at 20 mil . still 10 mil under without the increase in cap space then you have golston to cut hatcher retiring , garcon or djax could be cut stieger as well as could lavaou . roberts is also on the chopping block

we arent going to be players in FA we will sign some bargain basement guys and some of our IR guys will bounce back . get another good draft in and we make some progress . despite 9-7 last year we are in year 2 of a rebuild . we will get some needs addressed and next season we will get some more through the draft

 

[skinsdad62]

Sorry dad but I gotta disagree. Rg3 would have never seen that $16m even if he was playing lights out. The FO would have already renegotiated an extension to lower than cap hit in 2016. His hit would come in around that 10-12m range if he agreed to a 4-5 year extension. So we are talking about a much larger cap hit if we tag KC. Also, we are not in great shape cap wise. I'd put us middle of the pack. You have one player account for well over 50% of available cap space, that stresses everything else you would hope to do in FA. We can, and will, make some cuts to free up space, but we will have to replace everyone of those we cut so it's not a $ for $ saving. It's really best if we can sign him to a multi year deal and focus on addressing a few other holes this year.

oh my stance doesnt mean that it isnt better for us to sign him long term as it could appear to be . it does give us more room to maneuver and you are 100% right about that

 

[j_y19]

i disagree 16 mil would have been committed to Rg3 if he played and made the team . when he comes off the books all you are doing is shifting who gets the pay out cut riley and you are at 20 mil . still 10 mil under without the increase in cap space then you have golston to cut hatcher retiring , garcon or djax could be cut stieger as well as could lavaou . roberts is also on the chopping block

we arent going to be players in FA we will sign some bargain basement guys and some of our IR guys will bounce back . get another good draft in and we make some progress . despite 9-7 last year we are in year 2 of a rebuild . we will get some needs addressed and next season we will get some more through the draft

We currently have about $12m in available cap space. If we cut rg3, that gives us around 28m in space before any other cuts. That moves us from the bottom quartile to mid pack. Just like every other team, we can make additional room by cutting a handful of potential cap casualties. But for the exception of Andre Roberts, everyone of those potential cuts are significant players in terms of production and snap counts. So we have to replace them. You try and replace them with draftees or currently unaffiliated players that we can get for good value. But that doesn't always happen.

We will participate in FA much like we did last years. No superstars, but workman like performers that don't break the bank. But if KC costs us $20m, we won't have much left to play heavily.

As for rg3s cap hit, I maintain that if he lived up to expectations, his contract would have already been extended just as Wilson, luck, kapernick, and others in his class has done. That $16,m cap hit for his last year would , in reality, be much less.

 

[Breed]

I see. So it's all just a big gamble if we choose to sign him long term now. I assume that if we wait until after next season to work out a contract and he kicks ass, he is free to play the FA market and get Top $$$?? I really like Kirk, but signing him long term right now just makes me nervous as hell. Hopefully we will roll the dice and give him the $$$ and he works out. I hope the FO knows what they are doing.

If the Skins tag Cuz and he kicks ass this year. Then balks at signing a long term deal next year saying he wants out of DC or whatever. The Skins can simply tag him again if they so choose. Lets hope it doesn't go that route.

If Cousins would have been playing the better part of the last couple seasons and RG3 was riding the pine during that entire time, we would definitely know what we had in KC and this wouldn't even be a topic of conversation.

And no doubt Skins fans everywhere would've been patient and understanding. While the Skins played a QB who was drafted in the 4th rd. As the QB they traded a shitload of picks for and took with the 2nd pick in the draft. Who also won the NFL's ROY award and led the Skins to their first NFC East title in 13 years. Sat on the bench and offered nothing, but support of the entire situation.

 

[Sharkinva]

If the Skins tag Cuz and he kicks ass this year. Then balks at signing a long term deal next year saying he wants out of DC or whatever. The Skins can simply tag him again if they so choose. Lets hope it doesn't go that route.



And no doubt Skins fans everywhere would've been patient and understanding. While the Skins played a QB who was drafted in the 4th rd. As the QB they traded a shitload of picks for and took with the 2nd pick in the draft. Who also won the NFL's ROY award and led the Skins to their first NFC East title in 13 years. Sat on the bench and offered nothing, but support of the entire situation.

If Cousins plays on the tag and kicks ass, the cost of tagging him next year would be upwards of $25 million. Thats a very hard sell considering the fact that if he again played well, we would then be capwise unable to keep him any way. As to tag him a 3rd time would cost $31 million.

Would you rather sign him long term and if he sucks, it cost us $20-25 million over the next three years, or risk him $76 million over the same time span??

 

[redskinsfan]

When you tag someone, you presumptively set that tag as the value on that player. While there are times when a team is forced to tag a player (and the tag therefore is borne out circumstances truly unrelated to the player's worth), that's the reality you face. This can occur in non-tag scenarios as well such as when Joe Flacco got some serious jack when he won the Superbowl in his contract year. Was he worth that contract? Of course not. But guess what? His contract set a new market for QBs to look to going forward.

When the Redskins extended the $16.155M to RGIII for this upcoming season, you bet that set the market for Kirk Cousins. And if the Redskins want to tag him this year, they'd better be prepared to start off negotiations at $20M per year if they want to sign a deal before July 15.