For those that think Tyrod Taylor would be a cheap viable option

[Sharkinva]

Taylor is slated to make $12M this year in base salary.

Now yes that is half what Cousins would be on the cap. So in simple numbers he would be $12M less IF we could get him for exactly what he is making.

But here is a bit of reality folks.

Washington would need a QB
The Bills would need a QB
The Jets need a QB
The NIners need a QB
The Browns need a QB
Denver Might be in the market for a starter
The Bears need a QB


So assuming we ditch Cousins, that leaves 5-6 teams in need of a QB. Assume Romo goes some place and Denver is off that list and standing pat....

Take the bills out of the Taylor chase and that leaves us and two other teams likely vieing for one QB. Throw in the contract Oswieler got last year, and the contract Kirk WILL get if we let him go else where....


Taylor is likely to be a $16-18 million cap hit where ever he lands.

SO again yea technically cheaper if we are willing to outbid others for him. Viable.... well thats another topic.

 

[David_son]

He is staying in Buffalo anyway.

 

[ehb5]

Yea I don't expect him to be cheap like $3 mil a year. But if he can give us 80%of Kirk's production at 80% of the cost with no long term commitment that's not bad.

 

[Sharkinva]

Yea I don't expect him to be cheap like $3 mil a year. But if he can give us 80%of Kirk's production at 80% of the cost with no long term commitment that's not bad.

There is the rub. At his age, I dont think you get him on a short term or a prove it deal. Not with the number of teams in need of a QB at the moment.

Also factor in that we run a totally different offense than the Bills and our system is based on the QB getting the ball out quickly, and I think 80% production for 80% of the cost is a bit of a reach.

65% of the production for 80% of the cost on a long term deal might be more appropriate. Then again we are also talking about some one who has taken 78 sacks over the past two years as well.

 

[Sportster 72]

Not sure where you are getting 80% of from. Go to Pro Football Reference and compare stats. 3,000 less yards, 17 less TD passes, 30+ more sacks. I get your point and to be sure Cousins threw a lot more passes but that works for and against both also.

This all should be a moot point. I still believe the Redskins FO made a mistake when they failed to sign Cousin's before the 2016 season was over. Who knows what would have happened had they approached him early in 2015. Maybe they sign a 3 year deal that everyone is jumping up and down in joy about now. They let this get out of hand. I have no idea what they are going to do. Typical Redskins .... run out and pay Fat Albert $100 million and then agonize over paying a legitimate QB.

 

[ehb5]

There is the rub. At his age, I dont think you get him on a short term or a prove it deal. Not with the number of teams in need of a QB at the moment.

Also factor in that we run a totally different offense than the Bills and our system is based on the QB getting the ball out quickly, and I think 80% production for 80% of the cost is a bit of a reach.

65% of the production for 80% of the cost on a long term deal might be more appropriate. Then again we are also talking about some one who has taken 78 sacks over the past two years as well.

Well you may be right he may be more expensive than we'd like his deal right now isn't bad at all I believe. And keep in mind of only brought him up in the context of your hypothetical where kirk is gone. I think we can all agree ideally kirk is back.

 

[Sharkinva]

Well you may be right he may be more expensive than we'd like his deal right now isn't bad at all I believe. And keep in mind of only brought him up in the context of your hypothetical where kirk is gone. I think we can all agree ideally kirk is back.

His deal right now is counting just shy of $16M against the cap. I honestly dont expect him to come in any lower than $12M against the cap on a new deal with a new team.... for year one that is.

I think he gets no less than the Oswieler deal from last year, which by the way is likely to be well below what Kirk is probably going to get.

BUt as I said, is it worth it to save as much as 40% if you are also dealing with as much as a 40-50% drop off in performance from product A to product B?? In simple terms, the $1 roll of TP costs about $1.50 a roll less than the good stuff. But did you really save if you have to use three times as much in the end?? NOt to mention that dollar roll stuff will eventually leave you a bit chaffed.

 

[ehb5]

Not sure where you are getting 80% of from. Go to Pro Football Reference and compare stats. 3,000 less yards, 17 less TD passes, 30+ more sacks. I get your point and to be sure Cousins threw a lot more passes but that works for and against both also.

This all should be a moot point. I still believe the Redskins FO made a mistake when they failed to sign Cousin's before the 2016 season was over. Who knows what would have happened had they approached him early in 2015. Maybe they sign a 3 year deal that everyone is jumping up and down in joy about now. They let this get out of hand. I have no idea what they are going to do. Typical Redskins .... run out and pay Fat Albert $100 million and then agonize over paying a legitimate QB.

He has 76% of the total yards that KC has had over the past 2 years while playing with almost no offensive talent in comparison and running an offense focused on the run (and very good at it in large part thanks to tyrod - didn't we want to run more effectively?) The sacks are fair criticism but tyrod is a solid qb who could keep us afloat at a possibly reasonable price.

As for it being a moot point I agree. I still expect kirk back and have only mentioned tyrod in thr context of sharks hypothetical where kirk is gone.

I think hindsight being 20/20 obviously they should've locked him up last year (or ideally 2 years ago). But 2 years ago that would've made no sense and last year there were still plenty of reasons to be cautious. Did our cautiousness pay off this time? No. But it doesn't mean it wasn't a reasonable course of action.

 

[ehb5]

His deal right now is counting just shy of $16M against the cap. I honestly dont expect him to come in any lower than $12M against the cap on a new deal with a new team.... for year one that is.

I think he gets no less than the Oswieler deal from last year, which by the way is likely to be well below what Kirk is probably going to get.

BUt as I said, is it worth it to save as much as 40% if you are also dealing with as much as a 40-50% drop off in performance from product A to product B?? In simple terms, the $1 roll of TP costs about $1.50 a roll less than the good stuff. But did you really save if you have to use three times as much in the end?? NOt to mention that dollar roll stuff will eventually leave you a bit chaffed.

Well i mean im not buying a 40 to 50% drop in production. That seems aggressive. On top of that - this is all in the context of Kirk leaving so it's definitely our best option then.

 

[Sharkinva]

Well i mean im not buying a 40 to 50% drop in production. That seems aggressive. On top of that - this is all in the context of Kirk leaving so it's definitely our best option then.

Here are the basis on my numbers.

1. Taylor would be coming into a new offense for a new coach that he has zero familiarity with.
2. Our offense is the polar opposite of what he has been used to running and has done well in.

Those two add up to a steep learning curve.

3. Taylor has a tendency to hold onto the ball too long, thus leading to higher sack numbers. BIG red flag for any QB we would bring in as far as Im concerned.

4. Because of the previous three, and the liklihood of us having at minimum one new starting WR, and possibly both being new guys, as well as having to adjust our offense to fit the new QB... I can see a very steep drop off in the offensive production as a whole.

 

[ehb5]

Here are the basis on my numbers.

1. Taylor would be coming into a new offense for a new coach that he has zero familiarity with.
2. Our offense is the polar opposite of what he has been used to running and has done well in.

Those two add up to a steep learning curve.

3. Taylor has a tendency to hold onto the ball too long, thus leading to higher sack numbers. BIG red flag for any QB we would bring in as far as Im concerned.

4. Because of the previous three, and the liklihood of us having at minimum one new starting WR, and possibly both being new guys, as well as having to adjust our offense to fit the new QB... I can see a very steep drop off in the offensive production as a whole.

I don't think the learning curve is that steep. Guys come out of college running spread offenses and have success. Tyrods been an nfl qb for 6 years and shown he can be a solid one. Not saying there's no adjustment but between his competence/experience/ability and gruden being a good offensive mind I think things would run pretty smoothly. Tyrod does take sacks but he also offers things kirk doesn't. Would he be a step back? Yes. Would we still have a solid offense? I think so.

 

[skinsdad62]

I don't think the learning curve is that steep. Guys come out of college running spread offenses and have success. Tyrods been an nfl qb for 6 years and shown he can be a solid one. Not saying there's no adjustment but between his competence/experience/ability and gruden being a good offensive mind I think things would run pretty smoothly. Tyrod does take sacks but he also offers things kirk doesn't. Would he be a step back? Yes. Would we still have a solid offense? I think so.

ok so what do we give up to get him ?

 

[j_y19]

ok so what do we give up to get him ?

2 1sts?

 

[Breed]

ok so what do we give up to get him ?

Cuz for TT straight up

 

[skinsdad62]

Cuz for TT straight up

oh geez

 

[Sharkinva]

Cuz for TT straight up

The only way it truely works is if we throw in a 2nd rounder to sweeten the pot for the Bills to take Cousins off our hands. After all we are getting a Franchise QB and we would only be giving up a joe average.

 

[Breed]

oh geez

That would be pretty crazy eh.

The only way it truely works is if we throw in a 2nd rounder to sweeten the pot for the Bills to take Cousins off our hands. After all we are getting a Franchise QB and we would only be giving up a joe average.

You can stop filling up the ol' vag with wet sand as fast as you can. I was just joshin.

 

[Sharkinva]

That would be pretty crazy eh.



You can stop filling up the ol' vag with wet sand as fast as you can. I was just joshin.

SO was I.... mostly.

 

[GNG]

Taylor is slated to make $12M this year in base salary.

Now yes that is half what Cousins would be on the cap. So in simple numbers he would be $12M less IF we could get him for exactly what he is making.

But here is a bit of reality folks.

Washington would need a QB
The Bills would need a QB
The Jets need a QB
The NIners need a QB
The Browns need a QB
Denver Might be in the market for a starter
The Bears need a QB


So assuming we ditch Cousins, that leaves 5-6 teams in need of a QB. Assume Romo goes some place and Denver is off that list and standing pat....

Take the bills out of the Taylor chase and that leaves us and two other teams likely vieing for one QB. Throw in the contract Oswieler got last year, and the contract Kirk WILL get if we let him go else where....


Taylor is likely to be a $16-18 million cap hit where ever he lands.

SO again yea technically cheaper if we are willing to outbid others for him. Viable.... well thats another topic.

Maybe the Redskins should just draft a QB.

 

[Sharkinva]

Maybe the Redskins should just draft a QB.

YA know.. IM starting to think we are going to tag Kirk, he will sign it... and then we will draft a QB in either the first or second round.

Nothing like a $24M place holder to show what winning off the field is all about.