Does Synder want Cousins to play in D.C.?

[Skin'EmAll]

So there is a lot of talk allllllll day (on the radio) about how the skins screwed up by not signing Cousins long term last year.
Synder went stupid for RG3 and that didn't work out well. Could he be upset that Mike Shanahan actually knew what he was doing getting QB insurance. Is Synder hoping the impending FA or QB cuts will be the answer, so he doesn't have to pay a guy he never wanted anyway?

 

[Sharkinva]

INteresting concept... hope Danny isnt really that stupid

 

[Stymietee]

So there is a lot of talk allllllll day (on the radio) about how the skins screwed up by not signing Cousins long term last year.
Synder went stupid for RG3 and that didn't work out well. Could he be upset that Mike Shanahan actually knew what he was doing getting QB insurance. Is Synder hoping the impending FA or QB cuts will be the answer, so he doesn't have to pay a guy he never wanted anyway?

.....Or as I've suggested time and again a serious upgrade at backup that is capable or nearly as capable as Kirk is at running Gruden's offense.

 

[Sharkinva]

.....Or as I've suggested time and again a serious upgrade at backup that is capable or nearly as capable as Kirk is at running Gruden's offense.

Once again who?? You have thrown out this mystery guy and a bunch of garbage.

So unless you want to go back to the throw shit on the wall and see what sticks mentality... thats a hard sell.

Seriously bro, why do you hate the idea of Cousins as our QB so much??

 

[Stymietee]

Once again who?? You have thrown out this mystery guy and a bunch of garbage.

So unless you want to go back to the throw shit on the wall and see what sticks mentality... thats a hard sell.

Seriously bro, why do you hate the idea of Cousins as our QB so much??

You must not be reading my posts....there is no mystery guy....it's Kirk who ends up being the place holder because contrary to a lot of opinions, I believe that there is a very strong possibility that he gets franchised again.

I don't hate Kirk at all, but I do believe in being smart in doing football business. If they are not sold on Kirk it would be both foolish to sign him long term ...AND let him go. under that scenario the smart thing to do is to prepare to lose him in 2018. If you still don't see that as a real possibility , I can't help you!

 

[Stymietee]

BTW: I would love for them to sign Kirk to a team friendly contract that both can live with, but even then I still say upgrade at backup. Really do some serious homework and no more of that Colt McCoy, and likely Nate Sudfield bullshit. Hell If we had Brady, Unitas, Montana or some demigod at QB I still would say improve at backup. Smart teams do this and it's time that our team made the jump from stinking thinking to trendsetters!

 

[Sharkinva]

You must not be reading my posts....there is no mystery guy....it's Kirk who ends up being the place holder because contrary to a lot of opinions, I believe that there is a very strong possibility that he gets franchised again.

I don't hate Kirk at all, but I do believe in being smart in doing football business. If they are not sold on Kirk it would be both foolish to sign him long term ...AND let him go. under that scenario the smart thing to do is to prepare to lose him in 2018. If you still don't see that as a real possibility , I can't help you!

So what possible smart move could there be in having a 1 year $24 million dollar rental when on average it takes 3-5 years to develop a QB?? Never mind that the QBs in this draft are not considered all that good.

So you want to burn $24M and a high draft pick and HOPE like hell the guy we draft is ready to start in 2018, with little or no game time experience?? And you honestly expect me to believe you dont dislike Kirk?? If they arent sold on Kirk, its because they are too busy wishing they had a Brady or Luck.

Hell even on Lucks deal.. guess what... if he totally sucks and has to be cut after 2017, the Colts save $5m letting him go.

So even on a deal that matches Lucks, you get your two year place holder who can be cut in year three if it doesnt work out. Tagging him and hoping to draft/groom his replacement makes zero sense. Because in the end it would cost you more than simply signing him long term, and likely damages the team in the process.

So you can understand why I would think the real reason one would be pushing so hard for this line of thinking is a genuine dislike of Cousins.

 

[Sharkinva]

BTW: I would love for them to sign Kirk to a team friendly contract that both can live with, but even then I still say upgrade at backup. Really do some serious homework and no more of that Colt McCoy, and likely Nate Sudfield bullshit. Hell If we had Brady, Unitas, Montana or some demigod at QB I still would say improve at backup. Smart teams do this and it's time that our team made the jump from stinking thinking to trendsetters!

Name me one good team that has a backup capable of coming in challenging the starter?? This is what you are calling for right?? Hell name me one BAD team that has a a future starter on the bench that wasnt acquired by shear dumb luck.

 

[Stymietee]

If you believe in collusion...and I do...NFL style, what we have seen play out in Denver, New York (Jets), to a lesser extent Philadelphia and

So what possible smart move could there be in having a 1 year $24 million dollar rental when on average it takes 3-5 years to develop a QB?? Never mind that the QBs in this draft are not considered all that good.

So you want to burn $24M and a high draft pick and HOPE like hell the guy we draft is ready to start in 2018, with little or no game time experience?? And you honestly expect me to believe you dont dislike Kirk?? If they arent sold on Kirk, its because they are too busy wishing they had a Brady or Luck.

Hell even on Lucks deal.. guess what... if he totally sucks and has to be cut after 2017, the Colts save $5m letting him go.

So even on a deal that matches Lucks, you get your two year place holder who can be cut in year three if it doesnt work out. Tagging him and hoping to draft/groom his replacement makes zero sense. Because in the end it would cost you more than simply signing him long term, and likely damages the team in the process.

So you can understand why I would think the real reason one would be pushing so hard for this line of thinking is a genuine dislike of Cousins.

This question has been asked and answered too many times to do it again, you have your opinion and I have mine, respect!

 

[Stymietee]

Name me one good team that has a backup capable of coming in challenging the starter?? This is what you are calling for right?? Hell name me one BAD team that has a a future starter on the bench that wasnt acquired by shear dumb luck.

Remember that line that I just ended my last response with? Stinking thinking vs trendsetters? Well.......

 

[Stymietee]

So what possible smart move could there be in having a 1 year $24 million dollar rental when on average it takes 3-5 years to develop a QB?? Never mind that the QBs in this draft are not considered all that good.

So you want to burn $24M and a high draft pick and HOPE like hell the guy we draft is ready to start in 2018, with little or no game time experience?? And you honestly expect me to believe you dont dislike Kirk?? If they arent sold on Kirk, its because they are too busy wishing they had a Brady or Luck.

Hell even on Lucks deal.. guess what... if he totally sucks and has to be cut after 2017, the Colts save $5m letting him go.

So even on a deal that matches Lucks, you get your two year place holder who can be cut in year three if it doesnt work out. Tagging him and hoping to draft/groom his replacement makes zero sense. Because in the end it would cost you more than simply signing him long term, and likely damages the team in the process.

So you can understand why I would think the real reason one would be pushing so hard for this line of thinking is a genuine dislike of Cousins.

So what possible smart move could there be in having a 1 year $24 million dollar rental when on average it takes 3-5 years to develop a QB?? Never mind that the QBs in this draft are not considered all that good.

Yeah that Nate Sudfield draft selection was a real head scratcher

So you want to burn $24M and a high draft pick and HOPE like hell the guy we draft is ready to start in 2018, with little or no game time experience?? And you honestly expect me to believe you dont dislike Kirk?? If they arent sold on Kirk, its because they are too busy wishing they had a Brady or Luck.

It's ABSOLUTELY NOT a dislike of Kirk, I cannot figure out where your fixation with this line of thinking comes from. You have to admit that franchising him a year ago coupled with the real possibility of doing so again does indicate that they must ( for whatever reason) not be willing or able to come to terms with Cousins. My posts from way back have been about what happens then or in the interim, not about what's happening in the present. To me it's sort of an inside joke that others want to argue about silly things concerning our team...I choose to look ahead.

Hell even on Lucks deal.. guess what... if he totally sucks and has to be cut after 2017, the Colts save $5m letting him go.

Again, I could care less if they backed up the transport team of the first National Bank of Zamunda and paid Kirk. My thoughts are and have been centered on the questions that come after that related to winning championships. Having more than what we currently have in McCoy and likely Sudfield doesn't get us there if Kirk cannot go. It certainly would have helped them not back themselves into a corner with regards to his contract. I refuse to speak for our front office, but I do expect a lot more from them than the same dumb assed shit that is now commonly practiced in the NFL. Silly me, I actually thought that individual teams, and the NFL as a collective wanted to, in real terms, have the very best 53 guys filling their rosters, but hey, they also try to tell us that military flyovers and National Anthems are OK, but keep politics out of the Game. (Laughable)

So even on a deal that matches Lucks, you get your two year place holder who can be cut in year three if it doesn't work out. Tagging him and hoping to draft/groom his replacement makes zero sense. Because in the end it would cost you more than simply signing him long term, and likely damages the team in the process.

Pessimist much? You and I have had conversations about mismanagement and of course we had disagreements, you believe that, correct me if I'm wrong here, it takes 2-3 years to prepare the new guy right? Well I don't for this reason. Where you're right comes when you draft Joe Palookas which is common heretofore for our team. Let's stop doing that shit and start doing exactly what everyone is calling for at other positions when you need to improve. (BTW: Taylor is an intriguing option to upgrade with at reasonable cost)

So you can understand why I would think the real reason one would be pushing so hard for this line of thinking is a genuine dislike of Cousins.

So, if after all of this re-explaining, you still want to stick with an unwillingness to let go of something that you've obviously convinced yourself to be true...then my earlier statement was not accurate, I actually can help you. I've worked with many on a professional level with stronger fixations than those.

 

[Stymietee]

In the present = in this moment (sorry)

 

[Sharkinva]

Sty.. .I will say it like this.

1. Taylor is a sack magnet. So while you might find him interesting, I would be confused as to why.

2. Most teams dont have Backups that could compete for a starting role because if a guy considers himself a starter or even a possible starter, he doesnt go to a team with an established starter. Guys like that end up in Cleveland.

Most teams that have a guy they consider a franchise or even just a capable starter, end up with guys like Matt Schaub as their backup for the second reason I previously mentioned.


And yes I do think chasing the QB position will continue to damage the team. Its not being a pessimist if its already been proven that chasing the elite QB set this team back some where between 4-15 years already.

 

[Stymietee]

Sty.. .I will say it like this.

1. Taylor is a sack magnet. So while you might find him interesting, I would be confused as to why.

2. Most teams dont have Backups that could compete for a starting role because if a guy considers himself a starter or even a possible starter, he doesnt go to a team with an established starter. Guys like that end up in Cleveland.

Most teams that have a guy they consider a franchise or even just a capable starter, end up with guys like Matt Schaub as their backup for the second reason I previously mentioned.


And yes I do think chasing the QB position will continue to damage the team. Its not being a pessimist if its already been proven that chasing the elite QB set this team back some where between 4-15 years already.

1. Maybe not so much behind our (ever improving?) OLine, but again I respect your questioning a move like that. (read on)

2. Again, he goes there if he's drafted there or is a free agent and believes that A. He can beat out the current guy... B. He gets the best offer from that team.... C. It becomes the trend where front offices are trying to reign in the ballooning "Market Value" for their services. (Remember when running backs commanded top dollar?)

I'll tell you this, guys like Kirk are far more easily obtainable than the Brady's of the world. Contrary to popular opinion DEFENSE still wins championships and offense still sells tickets. That said, I believe that we are now witnessing changes in the NFL with more focus on building the team than "chasing" QB's. The interesting thing is there is already proof of this....Denver won a SB without a QB, The NY Giants made the playoffs with a pretty stout defense and a some timey QB and most glaring of all The Dallas Cowboys, top team in the NFC is there with rookies at both QB and RB!! I seem to recall a certain GM, Scott something or the other, stating that building the team would take precedence over overpaying any player. Could there be a SB in the future, without he who so much fuss is being made? Well, if I had to choose, bye Kirk!

 

[Sharkinva]

1. Maybe not so much behind our (ever improving?) OLine

2. Again, he goes there if he's drafted there or is a free agent and believes that A. He can beat out the current guy... B. He gets the best offer from that team.... C. It becomes the trend where front offices are trying to reign in the ballooning "Market Value" for their services. (Remember when running backs commanded top dollar?)

I'll tell you this, guys like Kirk are far more easily obtainable than the Brady's of the world. Contrary to popular opinion DEFENSE still wins championships and offense still sells tickets. That said, I believe that we are now witnessing changes in the NFL with more focus on building the team than "chasing" QB's. The interesting thing is there is already proof of this....Denver won a SB without a QB, The NY Giants made the playoffs with a pretty stout defense and a some timey QB and most glaring of all The Dallas Cowboys, top team in the NFC is there with rookies at both QB and RB!! I seem to recall a certain GM, Scott something or the other, stating that building the team would take precedence over overpaying any player. Could there be a SB in the future, without he who so much fuss is being made? Well, if I had to choose, bye Kirk!

If you had your way, it would have been bye Kirk two years ago though. So forgive me if I think you had a little bias built up in there to begin with.

 

[Stymietee]

If you had your way, it would have been bye Kirk two years ago though. So forgive me if I think you had a little bias built up in there to begin with.

Two years ago Kirk sucked, almost everyone wanted him gone!

 

[Sharkinva]

Two years ago Kirk sucked, almost everyone wanted him gone!

Two years ago both our Qbs sucked, but not every one wanted them both gone.

Just saying.

 

[Stymietee]

Two years ago both our Qbs sucked, but not every one wanted them both gone.

Just saying.

We agree...I said "almost"

 

[Caliskinsfan]

You two having fun?

 

[Sharkinva]

You two having fun?

Hell yea, I would love to play dodge ball with Sty and a few others around here. Cause if they can dodge a ball like they dodge the QB question.... we would be fucking world Champs in something.