My Thoughts on a Kirk Extension

[ehb5]

Here's what I think about Kirk and whether we should extend him based on what we know now.

I went through the QBs across the league today and looked at where Kirk sat amongst them since I hear a lot of comments about him being a middle of the pack QB. I found 18 QBs that are definitely better IMO. They are...

Rodgers, Cutler, Romo, Eli, Russell, Palmer, Brees, Cam, Ryan, Jameis, Ben, Dalton, Flacco, Carr, Rivers, Luck, Mariota, and Brady.

Then there are the QBs Kirk compares to a little more closely. Some of them are probably better than him and some are probably worse than him but like it or not the group Kirk fits into IMO is...

Tannehill, Fitzpatrick, Tyrod, Hoyer, Bortles, Smith, McCown, Teddy, and Stafford...and Kirk.

The numbers we have seen for Kirks extension have ranged anywhere from $5-17 mil a year it seems. None of those QBs deserve more than MAYBE $10 mil per right now. Thats not to say some of them cant get that on the open market but itll be an overpay.

Additionally of those 10 QBs in Kirks group, 4 (or 5 if we count Kirk who couldve been acquired for a mid round pick probably) could have been picked up off the scrap heap this past offseason. So while many of you have asked "who will we get if we dont keep Cousins?" I think you are forgetting that there are usually scrap heap options available who can do at least close to what Kirk is doing right now. Granted this year FA is especially weak at QB but that having been said - somebody who is that replaceable (yea, I know you guys dont think hes that replaceable) shouldnt be taking 12+ million dollars from us. And while Kirk could still develop its not likely he'll develop into a guy who can carry a team. I wouldnt be overly happy about paying any of the QBs in that list with Kirk much money. I would prefer to stream cheaper options if we can while we try to find somebody who can take this team to a SB.

All that said (think I covered everything I wanted to) Im not trying to convince you guys with this post because I know that won't happen but Im just laying out what I think so its all out there and explaining my POV.

3 Disclaimers
- This doesnt mean I dont think we should resign Kirk no matter what
- This doesnt mean I hate Kirk
- This doesnt mean Kirk cant change my opinion by the end of the season

 

[deanpet21]

When doing KC's contract you have to factor in his age. This is why he will get decent money b/c he is our best current and future option. There will be no QB in FA and I think we wont be able to get the top 3 QB's in the draft b/c of draft position. As of right now walterfootball has the top 3 QBs(Cook, Goff, and the Memphis kid) going in the top 10. We wont be a top 10 pick this year

I said it before KC is the guy. Especially if Gruden stays. The money will determine how KC finishes the season. You guys have to factor in that KC has no running game this year and he is working with one of the worst centers in the NFL. Plus losing Jackson for half the season had an effect. The bottom line here is that we are a better team with KC for 2016.

 

[ehb5]

When doing KC's contract you have to factor in his age. This is why he will get decent money b/c he is our best current and future option. There will be no QB in FA and I think we wont be able to get the top 3 QB's in the draft b/c of draft position. As of right now walterfootball has the top 3 QBs(Cook, Goff, and the Memphis kid) going in the top 10. We wont be a top 10 pick this year

I said it before KC is the guy. Especially if Gruden stays. The money will determine how KC finishes the season. You guys have to factor in that KC has no running game this year and he is working with one of the worst centers in the NFL. Plus losing Jackson for half the season had an effect. The bottom line here is that we are a better team with KC for 2016.

Thats true but he is 27. Hes young but not that young. He could still develop but thats what we're looking for the rest of the season. His value is not set in stone. And while we might be better with him we have to determine what thats worth.

And I wouldnt rule out being a top 10 pick yet.

 

[Stymietee]

IQUOTE="ehb5, post: 7601729, member: 5660"]Here's what I think about Kirk and whether we should extend him based on what we know now.

I went through the QBs across the league today and looked at where Kirk sat amongst them since I hear a lot of comments about him being a middle of the pack QB. I found 18 QBs that are definitely better IMO. They are...

Rodgers, Cutler, Romo, Eli, Russell, Palmer, Brees, Cam, Ryan, Jameis, Ben, Dalton, Flacco, Carr, Rivers, Luck, Mariota, and Brady.

Then there are the QBs Kirk compares to a little more closely. Some of them are probably better than him and some are probably worse than him but like it or not the group Kirk fits into IMO is...

Tannehill, Fitzpatrick, Tyrod, Hoyer, Bortles, Smith, McCown, Teddy, and Stafford...and Kirk.

The numbers we have seen for Kirks extension have ranged anywhere from $5-17 mil a year it seems. None of those QBs deserve more than MAYBE $10 mil per right now. Thats not to say some of them cant get that on the open market but itll be an overpay.

Additionally of those 10 QBs in Kirks group, 4 (or 5 if we count Kirk who couldve been acquired for a mid round pick probably) could have been picked up off the scrap heap this past offseason. So while many of you have asked "who will we get if we dont keep Cousins?" I think you are forgetting that there are usually scrap heap options available who can do at least close to what Kirk is doing right now. Granted this year FA is especially weak at QB but that having been said - somebody who is that replaceable (yea, I know you guys dont think hes that replaceable) shouldnt be taking 12+ million dollars from us. And while Kirk could still develop its not likely he'll develop into a guy who can carry a team. I wouldnt be overly happy about paying any of the QBs in that list with Kirk much money. I would prefer to stream cheaper options if we can while we try to find somebody who can take this team to a SB.

All that said (think I covered everything I wanted to) Im not trying to convince you guys with this post because I know that won't happen but Im just laying out what I think so its all out there and explaining my POV.

3 Disclaimers
- This doesnt mean I dont think we should resign Kirk no matter what
- This doesnt mean I hate Kirk
- This doesnt mean Kirk cant change my opinion by the end of the season[/QUOTE]


I would add Colt to that second list. However before anyone goes nuts with that, here's why. They both run Gruden's offense in fact Gruden himself was pushing for Colt to be his guy a year ago.That said Kirk has a stronger arm but Colt is head and shoulders above Kirk when the play breaks down and the QB must improvise. So somewhat of a wash there. There are no glaring differences between the two beyond those mentioned. If anyone can come up with differential comparisons beyond those spit them out. I firmly believe that Kirk got the starting nod because Arm trumped creativity. Using "he's the best option" has been overplayed, because that ends at the conclusion of the final game and I've given another option in this thread. No one can say the McCoy could have done the same or better given what's being asked.

 

[Stymietee]

Two corrections:

1. .......differential comparisons in this Offense

2........Should read McCoy could not have done the same or better given.............

 

[JonBlaze]

Mariota isn't better yet. He's got more upside as he's just a rookie and has better physical skill set, but KC is ahead of him right now. That being said, yes I'd take Mariota over him as there's seemingly a higher ceiling.

The second group is debatable, but it's close enough. Stafford should be in the above group, but he does dumb things trusting that arm of his. He's pretty similar to Cutler IMO, but Cutler is playing some good ball right now. Again debatable and if money wasn't a factor, I'd take Cutler or Stafford over KC every day of the week. I honestly think he's a Fitzpatrick type. Not terrible, but definitely not carrying a team on most days.

27 is sort of old, sort of young. Best case scenario we are looking for a Trent Green? Stan Humphries? How much do you pay for that? Tricky, but I'm trusting SM finds the right number that could pay KC if he performs but protects the Skins if he doesn't.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

Here's what I think about Kirk and whether we should extend him based on what we know now.

Then there are the QBs Kirk compares to a little more closely. Some of them are probably better than him and some are probably worse than him but like it or not the group Kirk fits into IMO is...

Tannehill, Fitzpatrick, Tyrod, Hoyer, Bortles, Smith, McCown, Teddy, and Stafford...and Kirk.

The numbers we have seen for Kirks extension have ranged anywhere from $5-17 mil a year it seems. None of those QBs deserve more than MAYBE $10 mil per right now. Thats not to say some of them cant get that on the open market but itll be an overpay.

First of all - again - any of us stating that none of those guys deserve more than $10 mil is irrelevant. It doesn't matter what you, I or anyone else (outside of an NFL GM) thinks about his value. It is about supply and demand & it only takes one other team to affect the future contract. It is a given that somebody will be overpaid - it has always been that way.

As for the QBs that you put in Cousin's category - forget about last offseason - moving forward I cannot see any of them as a suitable replacement since either a. they are no better & perhaps older or b. there is no way that they will be available. The only possible exception could be Stafford but no way the Redskins sign him at his expected asking price. Cousins is also probably a desired choice since he is already in the system and used to working with everyone else.

Oh well - as you alluded to - a lot depends on what happens for the remainder of the year. A win against the Giants this week and a road victory or two will likely go a long way for Cousins & his future contract.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

If the discussion is Kirk or go with scrap heap options then we've got a problem at QB. Me? I go with Kirk.

 

[j_y19]

If the discussion is Kirk or go with scrap heap options then we've got a problem at QB. Me? I go with Kirk.

I agree, even if it cost us a few $M more. There is value in continuity and having a QB that has been in the offense for 2 years already.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

If the discussion is Kirk or go with scrap heap options then we've got a problem at QB. Me? I go with Kirk.

You could be rt, but the Redskins would certainly not be the only team in this situation. Also - if next season their only true issue was w/ the QB situation I would not be that unhappy. There are plenty of other reasons why this team is not winning especially on the road. For starters running the ball or stopping the run - especially on the road - would be nice.

 

[gkekoa]

You pay a guy what he deserves...if somebody wants to pay him more...let them.

 

[deanpet21]

KC has leverage over the Redskins when contract talks come. Especially if he plays well. We are not a top 10 pick ehb. cmon.

 

[Sharkinva]

You pay a guy what he deserves...if somebody wants to pay him more...let them.

I think that is a bit to simplistic. In fact I think alot of what people think on the QB position as it relates to Kirk and what he SHOULD get paid are too simplistic.

Odds are if we resign Kirk, it will be as the starter. The going rate for a starter is in the $15-21 million per year range. We might not like it, hell some of dont even think he is worth $5 million a year. But the reality is, if we sign a guy for $5 million he will come in competing for the job against 1 or two other guys ALSO making $5 million a year if we expect to get anything even remotely competent at the position.

So again I will say, it comes down to three questions

1. What is the going rate for a starting QB


2. Is the team better off paying Kirk the going rate and having SOME sort of stability at the position for a couple of years

3. What are your realistic options if we go in another direction??


Honestly answer those three and then determine Kirks value. Because after all, the object should be to find what makes the team as a whole better. Right??

 

[Sharkinva]

KC has leverage over the Redskins when contract talks come. Especially if he plays well. We are not a top 10 pick ehb. cmon.

Lets just say Kirk continues his current level of play which right now falls into the middle of the pack, yet we lose out ( which is entirely possible) and end up with a top ten pick. Are we better served as a TEAM, drafting yet ANOTHER QB, who might be cheaper, but also guarantees another 2-3 years of rebuilding. OR sticking with Kirk and using that top ten pick on say, a Pass Rusher, DB, or WR taller than your average 5th grader??

 

[Sportster 72]

I think that is the thing if you have someone that is better than Cousins then great, the problem is solved. That is likely not the case. I do not think McCloughan or Allen is going to over pay. That is not their history. So it seems to me if he is at least mid pack in his first full year of starting you keep him to stabilize the position until you can find someone better. That likely would be a 2 or 3 year process.

 

[deanpet21]

Shark if that happens you still sign Kirk. We played one of the best defenses in the league. KC will get better. You guys don't factor in that KC has no running game and no center.

 

[Sharkinva]

Shark if that happens you still sign Kirk. We played one of the best defenses in the league. KC will get better. You guys don't factor in that KC has no running game and no center.

You are preaching to the Choir Dean. Unless Kirk totally melts down I think we need to resign him. Im not overly worried about what they pay him. And i think going in another direction hurts this team UNLESS Kirk has a melt down at this point. I wonder how much better he would have become had we not spent the bulk of the last two seasons trying to go in the other direction to begin with. Had Kirk been the starter going into 2-13 as he should have been, where would he be now?

 

[SoCalWizFan]

KC has leverage over the Redskins when contract talks come. Especially if he plays well. We are not a top 10 pick ehb. cmon.

Please define "if he plays well". Let's say that Cousins does pretty much the same as he has all season. Let's say that they lose all or two of the road games & Cousins plays avg or worse with several turnovers. Let's say that they also win 2 of 3 at home & Cousins plays well in those games. Would you consider that good enough?

Basically a 7-9 or 6-10 season and mixed results for Cousins. The Redskins would then be a team with promise but also major concerns - both for the team & Cousins. Do you believe that he would still have leverage in that situation?

 

[gkekoa]

I think that is a bit to simplistic. In fact I think alot of what people think on the QB position as it relates to Kirk and what he SHOULD get paid are too simplistic.

Odds are if we resign Kirk, it will be as the starter. The going rate for a starter is in the $15-21 million per year range. We might not like it, hell some of dont even think he is worth $5 million a year. But the reality is, if we sign a guy for $5 million he will come in competing for the job against 1 or two other guys ALSO making $5 million a year if we expect to get anything even remotely competent at the position.

So again I will say, it comes down to three questions

1. What is the going rate for a starting QB


2. Is the team better off paying Kirk the going rate and having SOME sort of stability at the position for a couple of years

3. What are your realistic options if we go in another direction??


Honestly answer those three and then determine Kirks value. Because after all, the object should be to find what makes the team as a whole better. Right??

Value can be market based. I agree with that statement. It is fluid. I think KC deserves about 10 mil per season and should know he is going to be the guy for the first year of his contract. I would go up to 12 mil/season. I am all for performance bonuses too because I believe in fair compensation. I would rather go in with a nobody that pay KC 17 mil/season. I see that as foolish unless we are talking very little in guarantees and only guaranteed money is in the first year. To pay KC, multi-year starter pay, after one season is ludicrous.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

You are preaching to the Choir Dean. Unless Kirk totally melts down I think we need to resign him. Im not overly worried about what they pay him. And i think going in another direction hurts this team UNLESS Kirk has a melt down at this point. I wonder how much better he would have become had we not spent the bulk of the last two seasons trying to go in the other direction to begin with. Had Kirk been the starter going into 2-13 as he should have been, where would he be now?

Can't tell because of a possible typo but are you stating that Cousins should have been the starter at the beginning of 2013? Seriously? RG3 was just coming off a playoff run & rookie of the year honors. There were certainly some injury concerns, but it didn't appear that bad at the time. What exactly would you have proposed that they could have done at that time? Cut or trade RG3? Ridiculous.

Easy to say otherwise in hindsight, but that would have made no sense at the time.