More KC contract news

[Sharkinva]

If Kirk does sign the tag, he gives DC the opening that they need to finish a trade. By signing the tag there is always the extended possibility that SM/ Bruce signs him to a LTD. This is the unknown factor when there are negotiations going on with a trading partner.

If Kirk, as I have always maintained since reports of a 16m top offer for him, wants out, then the best thing for us, is to move on. The fun part will be watching many followers here finally join the Sty train and realize that there are already better options available for us. If we ever play whatever team he goes to, it going to be a laugh a minute reading posts declaring Kirk as "not all that" leading a "team that we can beat" and such. I'm not going anywhere right now, but I can not wait to see ya in the future fellas.

Wrong.

If he signs the tender and the Skins simply try to trade him to say.. the Browns... all he has to do is refuse to show up for the Browns and in seven days the trade gets reascended. But lets not let little things like NFL rules get in the way of your desired outcome.

 

[Stymietee]

Wrong.

If he signs the tender and the Skins simply try to trade him to say.. the Browns... all he has to do is refuse to show up for the Browns and in seven days the trade gets reascended. But lets not let little things like NFL rules get in the way of your desired outcome.

Do better than simply looking at what I've written, read it in context. I'm talking about the extended time period that they have to sign him to a LTD if he signs the tag (until June something or the other). This gives them the unknown factor relating to that possibility. Yeah Cleveland, 99.9% sure that he won't do that with SF or Denver.

 

[Sharkinva]

Do better than simply looking at what I've written, read it in context. I'm talking about the extended time period that they have to sign him to a LTD if he signs the tag (until June something or the other). This gives them the unknown factor relating to that possibility. Yeah Cleveland, 99.9% sure that he won't do that with SF or Denver.

Once again.. Wrong.

If they tag him, the window of trading him has an expiration date. Its called April 7th latest. Because 20 days before the draft, any team that might need a QB is going to want to have draft plans in place before they get to the draft.

So the reality is, if we tag him with the intention to trade him, any smart team is going to want the trade to be done well before the draft so that they can asses their team needs accordingly. No one is going to risk a draft day trade with a player who can simply refuse to report at the QB position.

Also, once he signs the tender, the two first rounders are off the table because the trading team knows at that point we are trying to off him. Why pay top dollar for something the other team doesnt want any way??

Look man I know you want Kirk gone by almost any means necessary, and I think we all know the real reason why. But you dont get to have your cake and eat it to.

Either we resign Kirk long term, we deal him for far less than two first rounders, or he plays on the tag and walks in 2018 and we will be lucky to get a 3rd round comp pick in the end.

 

[Stymietee]

Dude the trading deadline is July 15th. You couldn't be more wrong about my feelings towards Kirk and staying here. I'm just way ahead of the curve and saw all of this coming over a year ago.

 

[Sharkinva]

Dude the trading deadline is July 15th. You couldn't be more wrong about my feelings towards Kirk and staying here. I'm just way ahead of the curve and saw all of this coming over a year ago.

No the long term deal deadline is July 15, the trading deadline is week eight of the season.

But again. NO team in their right mind is going to go into the draft HOPING they can work out a deal to trade for Cousins and miss out on drafting a QB SHOULD such a trade fall through. So reality is, if we ARE going to deal Kirk, it will need to be to a team he is content to go to, and it has to happen BEFORE the draft.

 

[Stymietee]

No the long term deal deadline is July 15, the trading deadline is week eight of the season.

But again. NO team in their right mind is going to go into the draft HOPING they can work out a deal to trade for Cousins and miss out on drafting a QB SHOULD such a trade fall through. So reality is, if we ARE going to deal Kirk, it will need to be to a team he is content to go to, and it has to happen BEFORE the draft.

I'd say that he would use his hair dryer to make sure that the ink dries quickly if the team in question was SF or Denver.

 

[Sharkinva]

I'd say that he would use his hair dryer to make sure that the ink dries quickly if the team in question was SF or Denver.

And I would say that the moment we tag him, we will be lucky to get one first round pick for him in 2018, much less two first rounders... Not because he isnt worth it mind you. But because you dont pay top dollar for something that the seller is trying to get rid of in the first place.

To barrow a phrase from Dean... we either hand Kirk a blank check, or we take the best offer we can get which wont be two first round picks.

 

[Stymietee]

And I would say that the moment we tag him, we will be lucky to get one first round pick for him in 2018, much less two first rounders... Not because he isnt worth it mind you. But because you dont pay top dollar for something that the seller is trying to get rid of in the first place.

To barrow a phrase from Dean... we either hand Kirk a blank check, or we take the best offer we can get which wont be two first round picks.

Can't keep going back and forth over covered territory, however the seller's perspective is not the only one in play. The buyer has a perspective as well.

 

[Sharkinva]

Can't keep going back and forth over covered territory, however the seller's perspective is not the only one in play. The buyer has a perspective as well.

Actually IM looking at this 100% from the buyers perspective. If I walk into a yard sale, and I find something I actually need, but the seller is asking a crazy price for something he obviously doesnt want to keep... why on earth do I give him top dollar for something he doesnt want any more. If he actually wanted to keep it, he wouldnt have put it out front in the first place right??

At MOST I offer him half what he was asking, if he says no.... Odds are I can find it some place else. And he can lug it back into the garage and watch as his perceived value continues to drop.

 

[Stymietee]

Actually IM looking at this 100% from the buyers perspective. If I walk into a yard sale, and I find something I actually need, but the seller is asking a crazy price for something he obviously doesnt want to keep... why on earth do I give him top dollar for something he doesnt want any more. If he actually wanted to keep it, he wouldnt have put it out front in the first place right??

At MOST I offer him half what he was asking, if he says no.... Odds are I can find it some place else. And he can lug it back into the garage and watch as his perceived value continues to drop.

WOW...I hope that you realize that you've relegated Kirk to a yard sell item that wasn't worth the asking price. Now as analogies go this one was actually funny to read.

 

[Sharkinva]

WOW...I hope that you realize that you've relegated Kirk to a yard sell item that wasn't worth the asking price. Now as analogies go this one was actually funny to read.

Dude.. I will say it like this. For one second, stop looking at this as what do I want to happen. And look at it, would I do that from a buyers perspective.

Now its rather obvious YOU dont think Kirk is worth signing to a long term deal at market value.

So as the buyer, assuming the Skins also DONT think Kirk is worth what he is asking. Would you personally give up two first rounders for a player that the team doesnt want.

Because the truth is, if we tag Kirk then try to trade him, he is no more than a busted lawn mower that we dont actually want, but expect to get a premium price for.

So I ask you. If IM trying to sell you a lawn mower that you might need, but I obviously dont want.. are you going to pay me top dollar for something I just want gone any way??

 

[skinsdad62]

some of you guys are forgetting one huge thing its called the transition tag , and it can be used in 2018 for about 28 mil not 34 the press cant seem to come to grips with

you transition him in 2018 and when he come back with an offer sheet you match it or draft the USC kid

 

[Stymietee]

Dude.. I will say it like this. For one second, stop looking at this as what do I want to happen. And look at it, would I do that from a buyers perspective.

Now its rather obvious YOU dont think Kirk is worth signing to a long term deal at market value.

So as the buyer, assuming the Skins also DONT think Kirk is worth what he is asking. Would you personally give up two first rounders for a player that the team doesnt want.

Because the truth is, if we tag Kirk then try to trade him, he is no more than a busted lawn mower that we dont actually want, but expect to get a premium price for.

So I ask you. If IM trying to sell you a lawn mower that you might need, but I obviously dont want.. are you going to pay me top dollar for something I just want gone any way??

First, your opening line here clearly shows that you're confusing me with someone else, or making assumptions not based in fact. Buyer's more often than not, in all walks of life, overpay for things. It's far from unusual to see items or services being paid at marked up prices. (Jordans are a good example). So Iam looking at it from a perspective buyers perspective.

Next, I don't give a flying damn if Dan Snyder signed over half ownership to Kirk in order to get him to stay. Every post that I have ever made regarding Kirk has been based upon my (emphasize....MY) evaluation of him as a player. The problem here is that others don't agree with my assessment and that's fine. It's in part why this site is as enjoyable to me as it is.

So the buyer will be looking at Kirk as a valued commodity that is available only because he and his current employer cannot come to agreeable terms, not as you suggest.... unwanted.

This is where a lot of those analogies fail, especially the one that someone else put forward about an engine vs. a transmission. The correct type of analogy in this instance, would be one (if we want to stick with cars) in which, you had a high end, finely tuned auto but needed to hire a driver. In it there's no best one but a series of lesser, equal, or more talented types.

However, just for shits and giggles, if I wanted your lawn mower and my options were few and far between, then yes, I either pay your price or do without. Of course in the Kirk situation, whether we like them or not, think it unwise or not, will continue to support this team or not, there are other options beyond him. We all hope that he stays, but if he doesn't, we move on. I got there earlier than most it seems, but now, as evidenced by the many threads on the subject others are realizing that this (losing his services) could become a reality.

 

[Sharkinva]

Sty.. its rather telling that i ask a simple question... Would you give up two first rounders knowing, or even suspecting that the Skins didnt want to keep Kirk.. and you flip it to a three paragraph answer explaining how buyers over pay all the time. You say you want the Skins to keep him, but have spent countless posts explaining how there ARE better options.

Question then becomes, if there ARE better options that likely wont cost the Niners or any other team TWO first rounders... why would any one make Cousins an offer that would cost them more than he is worth in your eyes.. and two first rounders to boot.

I await your next master thesis level post.

 

[Stymietee]

Sty.. its rather telling that i ask a simple question... Would you give up two first rounders knowing, or even suspecting that the Skins didnt want to keep Kirk (#1).. and you flip it to a three paragraph answer explaining how buyers over pay all the time. You say you want the Skins to keep him, but have spent countless posts explaining how there ARE better options. (comment)

Question then becomes, if there ARE better options that likely wont cost the Niners or any other team TWO first rounders (#2)... why would any one make Cousins an offer that would cost them more than he is worth in your eyes.. and two first rounders to boot.(#3)

I await your next master thesis level post.

(Comment)

You didn't ask a simple question, instead you posted a rather extensive series of lines that included the "buyer" analogy. It doesn't take long to verify this it's just above these last two posts. I responded to each of them.

So a direct answer to your question (#1) is......Yes...beause the caveat that YOU introduced into it DOES NOT exist.

There are better options

A direct answer to your question (#2) is....because, we may not be able to come to terms with him and it's likely that THEY see him as the best option for THEM.

A direct answer to your question (#3) is.....Nowhere can you find me putting a $$DOLLAR$$ limit or ceiling on Cousins. In fact I just posted that I wouldn't care if Dan Snyder gave him half ownership. My evaluation or valuation of him is merely as a football player (Talent wise)

Finally, I've tried the dumb down route here for a couple of years and grew tried of it. Maybe it's time that we communicated and reasoned on a higher less simplistic level.

 

[Stymietee]

**Communicate and reason...oops!

 

[Sharkinva]

I dont know Hoss. When ever the question is asked, I see alot of baffle em with Bullshit answers. And Im not singling you out on this Sty. But seriously... when that question is asked should we resign Cousins..

I see alot of yes BUT...

Followed by there are better options, or there are alternatives.

I agree that there are alternatives. We could simply let him walk and sign Tebow. that after all is an option.

To me a better option (money aside) has got to provide damn near iron clad lock better production.

Any other option is likely being thrown out because people are looking for a way to move away from Cousins.

 

[Stymietee]

I dont know Hoss. When ever the question is asked, I see alot of baffle em with Bullshit answers. And Im not singling you out on this Sty. But seriously... when that question is asked should we resign Cousins..

I see alot of yes BUT...

Followed by there are better options, or there are alternatives.

I agree that there are alternatives. We could simply let him walk and sign Tebow. that after all is an option.

To me a better option (money aside) has got to provide damn near iron clad lock better production.

Any other option is likely being thrown out because people are looking for a way to move away from Cousins.

I understand that people don't agree with my assessment that doing it the way I see it, actually improves the team, but that's the fun part in all of this to me.

 

[Sharkinva]

I understand that people don't agree with my assessment that doing it the way I see it, actually improves the team, but that's the fun part in all of this to me.

Oh I agree it MIGHT improve the team. But history has shown that changing QBs ever couple of years, and chasing the elite QB. Block buster draft trades for the next "IT" QB, has gotten us to exactly where we were two years ago. So yea, we MIGHT get lucky and some how find the next Tom Brady/Dak Prescott/Aron Rogers hybrid that will come in and elevate our QB position from good to extremely great.

The teams that are legitimately in the playoffs and Super Bowl hunt every year have two things in common

1. Stability at HC
2. Stability at QB.

Im willing to forgo winning off the field for the next three or more seasons to achieve a little stability at both #1 and #2.

 

[Stymietee]

Oh I agree it MIGHT improve the team. But history has shown that changing QBs ever couple of years, and chasing the elite QB. Block buster draft trades for the next "IT" QB, has gotten us to exactly where we were two years ago. So yea, we MIGHT get lucky and some how find the next Tom Brady/Dak Prescott/Aron Rogers hybrid that will come in and elevate our QB position from good to extremely great.

The teams that are legitimately in the playoffs and Super Bowl hunt every year have two things in common

1. Stability at HC
2. Stability at QB.

Im willing to forgo winning off the field for the next three or more seasons to achieve a little stability at both #1 and #2.

Of course, you've made that abundantly clear, much respect for sticking with your POV. However, to be much clearer than in my last response, We keep Gruden, Upgrade at QB and improve as a team.....going the Sty route.