You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Kirk Cousins is our long term answer
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 48, 49, 50 ... 98, 99, 100  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Washington Redskins
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 81159
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kirk has been too 15 in ever my statistically qb category over the last two years and this year the only one he wasn't too 10 in was TD passes but there are a lot of reasons for that, some Kirk had control over, some he didn't. We've talked about them at nauseum!
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md

"God made certain people to play football... Sean was one" JG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Thaiphoon


Moderator
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 19117
Location: Northern Virginia
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

turtle28 wrote:
Kirk has been too 15 in ever my statistically qb category over the last two years and this year the only one he wasn't too 10 in was TD passes but there are a lot of reasons for that, some Kirk had control over, some he didn't. We've talked about them at nauseum!


Yes. No one cares he was basically the reason we won 8 games. They only want to cherry pick the games he wasn't good in. Which is their prerogative, I guess.

I don't mind taking him to task and taking some money away at the table for the last 2 home games. But to say he doesn't deserve market rate because of it (and thus ignoring his body of work for the entire season), is ridiculous and short sighted. And shows the people who are more worried about "winning the salary cap in 2016" than winning actual games in the next few years.
_________________


As long as Dan Snyder owns the team, the Redskins will not win another Super Bowl
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
21 ALL THE WAY


Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Posts: 5901
Location: WASHINGTON DC
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thaiphoon wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
And for the umpteenth time I wouldn't sign him to a long term deal unless you consider 5 years with a option the 3rd year long term. Brady, Rodgers, Marino, Elway, Brees, Manning all made big plays when needed to get there team over the hump! Kirk had a bad game last year against the Packers in the playoffs and a bad game this year when it was a must win to get us in the playoffs. He's not in the class of Brady, Rodgers, Elway, Brees, or Manning when it comes down to decision making or trust going into a game compared to those guys in my book.
If teams only re-signed HOF QBs, no one would have any QBs.


I dont think I said I wouldn't resign him, I said I would only resign him for the right price. Brady making more or asking for more than 25 million per year? Think he's turned down plenty of chances to increase his salary but hasnt and still makes no names look like Greats!
The problem is there is a real market for Qbs who are top 10 starting Qbs and a "fictional Redskins fans will pay this much for Kirk Cousins market," your contract offer falls into the latter and when that happens, you can either just let Kirk walk, or use the non-exclusive tag on him and trade him or tag him this year only to have him walk next offseason. He's not going to sign your contract, and if he's not going to sign your lowball contract, just like last offseaon, he'll walk, be tagged again, be tagged and traded or be tagged with his year and walk next offseason.

You say you want Cousins to be our Qb, but you sound exactly like ascot McCloughan and the skins FO last offseason, you are lowballing him by at the least $20 million in guarantees and Kirk is not going to go for that because when he hits the open market he will get a contract that makes him the most expensive qb in the NFL - for how every long that is, could be days, weeks, months or a year until the next qb signs a bigger deal - no matter what you think he should sign, that doesn't matter, the truth is he's going to break contract records if he hits the open FA market because there's a handful of teams, including the skins that will be bidding on his services. Cousins knows this, he's smarter than you or I and most people about his own situation.

If he did hit free agency I have no doubt that the teeet that HTTTRG3 posted would be true from EB on the junkies when they had a former agent on their show a week ago:

@ebjunkies
Quote:
Wow. @corryjoel suggests on open market Kirk could potentially get $26.5+ mil per yr... $90 million guaranteed. Id want to leave too.
Kirk is going to bet on himself if the skins aren't going to coke close to this. Now, the deal can be structured in such a way that his cap hit for the next two seasons is lower than or right around what his cap hit was this year and then gets higher for the next 6 or 7 years after.


Turlte if you haven't notice by now, I dont care if he feels lowballed! I felt lowballed watching him against Dallas twice!! I felt lowballed watching him at home throw 2 picks against the Giants in a must win game! So yea once again take the deal or you will be traded or possibly Franchised again Mr Cousins!

Your thinking like the Eagles, Houston, and Miami. I'm thinking like SM of last year and Elway when he let Brock go to another team for more guranteed money only to be benched! It's no guarantee Cousins will succeed anywhere else! Its happen to plenty of guys in new systems. Guess your so one sided you cant see that. Long deal and he ends up being our Tony Romo, your gonna be happy with a QB who you cant count on in BIG GAMES and BIG Moments?


See bolded...

And yet, by Scot doing that, he not only DIDN'T help the team, but he then handed Kirk even MORE leverage over the team.

The second point invalidates your whole argument. Yes, Elway let Brock go.

...The SB winning team with a great defense...let Brock go..

And even though Brock got benched (for a time), Brock still led his team to the playoffs while the Broncos didn't make it (even with a good defense and arguably the best defensive player in the NFL).

Because even with that defense, that 7th rounder and the rookie were far inferior to Brock.


Thats your opinion not mine. We can agree to disagree.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
21 ALL THE WAY


Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Posts: 5901
Location: WASHINGTON DC
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thaiphoon wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Kirk has been too 15 in ever my statistically qb category over the last two years and this year the only one he wasn't too 10 in was TD passes but there are a lot of reasons for that, some Kirk had control over, some he didn't. We've talked about them at nauseum!


Yes. No one cares he was basically the reason we won 8 games. They only want to cherry pick the games he wasn't good in. Which is their prerogative, I guess.

I don't mind taking him to task and taking some money away at the table for the last 2 home games. But to say he doesn't deserve market rate because of it (and thus ignoring his body of work for the entire season), is ridiculous and short sighted. And shows the people who are more worried about "winning the salary cap in 2016" than winning actual games in the next few years.


25 million for possibly 3 years is low balling him? How? Please just stay on that subject. How is paying 25 million a year to Kirk Cousins a low ball offer?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
21 ALL THE WAY


Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Posts: 5901
Location: WASHINGTON DC
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 9:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thaiphoon wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
And for the umpteenth time I wouldn't sign him to a long term deal unless you consider 5 years with a option the 3rd year long term. Brady, Rodgers, Marino, Elway, Brees, Manning all made big plays when needed to get there team over the hump! Kirk had a bad game last year against the Packers in the playoffs and a bad game this year when it was a must win to get us in the playoffs. He's not in the class of Brady, Rodgers, Elway, Brees, or Manning when it comes down to decision making or trust going into a game compared to those guys in my book.
If teams only re-signed HOF QBs, no one would have any QBs.


I dont think I said I wouldn't resign him, I said I would only resign him for the right price. Brady making more or asking for more than 25 million per year? Think he's turned down plenty of chances to increase his salary but hasnt and still makes no names look like Greats!


So then he's a top 10 QB (not top 5). I can live with that. Doesn't mean that when he is a FA he's not going to command top dollar. Top 10 QBs don't become FAs too often. By all means, please identify the QB you would replace him with right now. Because he's not going to sign your lowball offer. And will instead force the tag and then leave next year. So you better be ready to:

A) Start over at QB
B) See A - then you're starting over on offense
C) See A - then you're not drafting a stud defensive player in the 1st this year
D) See A - no defensive FA is going to want to come to a team that is rebuilding on BOTH sides of the ball.

So, if you want this team to continue to suck. Lowball him.

If you want this team (not just at QB) to continue to get better, you sign him to a market rate contract that we can get out of in 3 years. That way our offensive players continue to grow and since we have a good offense, we can attrlact defensive players to shore up the defense...AND use our 2017 and 2018 early picks on defense instead of packaging them to move up to get a QB that may or may not flame out.

Nah...your way seems better. Let's get rid of him by lowballing him and giving him an offer no QB in his position would sign. Because I'm fairly certain that if the Redskins do that (lowball me with a ridiculous offer) again this year and I force them to tag me, I'm not going to come to the table this summer and work out a long term deal and will instead make plans to leave in 2018. And if that works out that way, I won't blame Cousins one bit.


Guess its no way we can get a pick for him from a team right? Who was the QB Elway had in place when Brock left? So it doesn't matter who is at QB, I'm not overpaying just to keep this guy around! Let someone else do that. Just say you dont agree instead of making it seem like what I'm saying is completely impossible. The Skins will continue to be a Franchise with or without Cousins.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thaiphoon


Moderator
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 19117
Location: Northern Virginia
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
And for the umpteenth time I wouldn't sign him to a long term deal unless you consider 5 years with a option the 3rd year long term. Brady, Rodgers, Marino, Elway, Brees, Manning all made big plays when needed to get there team over the hump! Kirk had a bad game last year against the Packers in the playoffs and a bad game this year when it was a must win to get us in the playoffs. He's not in the class of Brady, Rodgers, Elway, Brees, or Manning when it comes down to decision making or trust going into a game compared to those guys in my book.
If teams only re-signed HOF QBs, no one would have any QBs.


I dont think I said I wouldn't resign him, I said I would only resign him for the right price. Brady making more or asking for more than 25 million per year? Think he's turned down plenty of chances to increase his salary but hasnt and still makes no names look like Greats!
The problem is there is a real market for Qbs who are top 10 starting Qbs and a "fictional Redskins fans will pay this much for Kirk Cousins market," your contract offer falls into the latter and when that happens, you can either just let Kirk walk, or use the non-exclusive tag on him and trade him or tag him this year only to have him walk next offseason. He's not going to sign your contract, and if he's not going to sign your lowball contract, just like last offseaon, he'll walk, be tagged again, be tagged and traded or be tagged with his year and walk next offseason.

You say you want Cousins to be our Qb, but you sound exactly like ascot McCloughan and the skins FO last offseason, you are lowballing him by at the least $20 million in guarantees and Kirk is not going to go for that because when he hits the open market he will get a contract that makes him the most expensive qb in the NFL - for how every long that is, could be days, weeks, months or a year until the next qb signs a bigger deal - no matter what you think he should sign, that doesn't matter, the truth is he's going to break contract records if he hits the open FA market because there's a handful of teams, including the skins that will be bidding on his services. Cousins knows this, he's smarter than you or I and most people about his own situation.

If he did hit free agency I have no doubt that the teeet that HTTTRG3 posted would be true from EB on the junkies when they had a former agent on their show a week ago:

@ebjunkies
Quote:
Wow. @corryjoel suggests on open market Kirk could potentially get $26.5+ mil per yr... $90 million guaranteed. Id want to leave too.
Kirk is going to bet on himself if the skins aren't going to coke close to this. Now, the deal can be structured in such a way that his cap hit for the next two seasons is lower than or right around what his cap hit was this year and then gets higher for the next 6 or 7 years after.


Turlte if you haven't notice by now, I dont care if he feels lowballed! I felt lowballed watching him against Dallas twice!! I felt lowballed watching him at home throw 2 picks against the Giants in a must win game! So yea once again take the deal or you will be traded or possibly Franchised again Mr Cousins!

Your thinking like the Eagles, Houston, and Miami. I'm thinking like SM of last year and Elway when he let Brock go to another team for more guranteed money only to be benched! It's no guarantee Cousins will succeed anywhere else! Its happen to plenty of guys in new systems. Guess your so one sided you cant see that. Long deal and he ends up being our Tony Romo, your gonna be happy with a QB who you cant count on in BIG GAMES and BIG Moments?


See bolded...

And yet, by Scot doing that, he not only DIDN'T help the team, but he then handed Kirk even MORE leverage over the team.

The second point invalidates your whole argument. Yes, Elway let Brock go.

...The SB winning team with a great defense...let Brock go..

And even though Brock got benched (for a time), Brock still led his team to the playoffs while the Broncos didn't make it (even with a good defense and arguably the best defensive player in the NFL).

Because even with that defense, that 7th rounder and the rookie were far inferior to Brock.


Thats your opinion not mine. We can agree to disagree.


Wait...its a matter of opinion that the Broncos let Brock go and Brock is now playing in the playoffs with the team he signed with and the Broncos missed the playoffs?


Can someone tell the NFL that? Laughing
_________________


As long as Dan Snyder owns the team, the Redskins will not win another Super Bowl


Last edited by Thaiphoon on Wed Jan 11, 2017 11:26 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thaiphoon


Moderator
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 19117
Location: Northern Virginia
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Kirk has been too 15 in ever my statistically qb category over the last two years and this year the only one he wasn't too 10 in was TD passes but there are a lot of reasons for that, some Kirk had control over, some he didn't. We've talked about them at nauseum!


Yes. No one cares he was basically the reason we won 8 games. They only want to cherry pick the games he wasn't good in. Which is their prerogative, I guess.

I don't mind taking him to task and taking some money away at the table for the last 2 home games. But to say he doesn't deserve market rate because of it (and thus ignoring his body of work for the entire season), is ridiculous and short sighted. And shows the people who are more worried about "winning the salary cap in 2016" than winning actual games in the next few years.


25 million for possibly 3 years is low balling him? How? Please just stay on that subject. How is paying 25 million a year to Kirk Cousins a low ball offer?


So you're suddenly now wanting to pay him $75M guaranteed? Since when? You keep wanting to pay him $45M guaranteed. When did this conversion take place?
_________________


As long as Dan Snyder owns the team, the Redskins will not win another Super Bowl
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thaiphoon


Moderator
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 19117
Location: Northern Virginia
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 11:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
And for the umpteenth time I wouldn't sign him to a long term deal unless you consider 5 years with a option the 3rd year long term. Brady, Rodgers, Marino, Elway, Brees, Manning all made big plays when needed to get there team over the hump! Kirk had a bad game last year against the Packers in the playoffs and a bad game this year when it was a must win to get us in the playoffs. He's not in the class of Brady, Rodgers, Elway, Brees, or Manning when it comes down to decision making or trust going into a game compared to those guys in my book.
If teams only re-signed HOF QBs, no one would have any QBs.


I dont think I said I wouldn't resign him, I said I would only resign him for the right price. Brady making more or asking for more than 25 million per year? Think he's turned down plenty of chances to increase his salary but hasnt and still makes no names look like Greats!


So then he's a top 10 QB (not top 5). I can live with that. Doesn't mean that when he is a FA he's not going to command top dollar. Top 10 QBs don't become FAs too often. By all means, please identify the QB you would replace him with right now. Because he's not going to sign your lowball offer. And will instead force the tag and then leave next year. So you better be ready to:

A) Start over at QB
B) See A - then you're starting over on offense
C) See A - then you're not drafting a stud defensive player in the 1st this year
D) See A - no defensive FA is going to want to come to a team that is rebuilding on BOTH sides of the ball.

So, if you want this team to continue to suck. Lowball him.

If you want this team (not just at QB) to continue to get better, you sign him to a market rate contract that we can get out of in 3 years. That way our offensive players continue to grow and since we have a good offense, we can attrlact defensive players to shore up the defense...AND use our 2017 and 2018 early picks on defense instead of packaging them to move up to get a QB that may or may not flame out.

Nah...your way seems better. Let's get rid of him by lowballing him and giving him an offer no QB in his position would sign. Because I'm fairly certain that if the Redskins do that (lowball me with a ridiculous offer) again this year and I force them to tag me, I'm not going to come to the table this summer and work out a long term deal and will instead make plans to leave in 2018. And if that works out that way, I won't blame Cousins one bit.


Guess its no way we can get a pick for him from a team right?


Sure. Which team? And which pick? it has to be a top 3 pick if you're interested in not having to package up a ton of picks (that could be used to shore up our defense) to move up and grab a QB.

And which QB do you want to take that is going to put us in the playoffs in 2017 with no run game and no defense? You've yet to identify this amorphous creature. So I'm basically daring you to identify him now. You want to let Kirk walk by lowballing him. Then identify the QB you've targeted as his replacement.

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Who was the QB Elway had in place when Brock left?


Siemien. And they got Lynch (you know the 1st rounder). Neither one got them to the playoffs. So this doesn't actually help your case. It actually hurts it.

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
It doesn't matter who is at QB,


It actually does matter. As I and others have shown. And your own example you think proves your point actually completely invalidates it and proves mine.

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
I'm not overpaying just to keep this guy around! Let someone else do that.


You're keeping him on the team so the offensive players can continue to grow and get better as well as he can. You're keeping him on the team so you can focus on the defense. You're keeping him on the team so that you don't turn another position (QB) into a position of need. You're keeping him on the team because he operates the offense at a high level. You're keeping him on the team because you didn't make the playoffs last year and didn't have a winning record this year without him.

As for overpaying? You might have to get a little uncomfortable with the contract that Kirk will command this offseason. And the reason is the refusal to pony up the money last year and telling him to go out and do it again (which he did). You gambled. You lost. He is now worth more money per year than he was last offseason when I (and others) had clamored to sign him ong term. Scot gambled and lost. And now Kirk has the most leverage of any FA in the NFL right now.

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Just say you dont agree instead of making it seem like what I'm saying is completely impossible.


Not impossible. Highly improbable. Kirk would need to take leave of his senses to sign a lowball offer with as low a guaranteed amount as you've bandied about here (as low as $45M at one point, but it seems to have changed?)

So what is your contract you'd now offer?

Years
Total $
Guaranteed $

What is that you'd offer if you were the GM right now? I'm curious.


21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
The Skins will continue to be a Franchise with or without Cousins.


Absolutely. Here we agree. But we'd also be a franchise that has regressed on both sides of the ball if we suddenly turn QB into a position of need and have to return to Snyder's early years. But you're right, they will continue to be "a franchise".
_________________


As long as Dan Snyder owns the team, the Redskins will not win another Super Bowl
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
21 ALL THE WAY


Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Posts: 5901
Location: WASHINGTON DC
PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2017 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thaiphoon wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
And for the umpteenth time I wouldn't sign him to a long term deal unless you consider 5 years with a option the 3rd year long term. Brady, Rodgers, Marino, Elway, Brees, Manning all made big plays when needed to get there team over the hump! Kirk had a bad game last year against the Packers in the playoffs and a bad game this year when it was a must win to get us in the playoffs. He's not in the class of Brady, Rodgers, Elway, Brees, or Manning when it comes down to decision making or trust going into a game compared to those guys in my book.
If teams only re-signed HOF QBs, no one would have any QBs.


I dont think I said I wouldn't resign him, I said I would only resign him for the right price. Brady making more or asking for more than 25 million per year? Think he's turned down plenty of chances to increase his salary but hasnt and still makes no names look like Greats!
The problem is there is a real market for Qbs who are top 10 starting Qbs and a "fictional Redskins fans will pay this much for Kirk Cousins market," your contract offer falls into the latter and when that happens, you can either just let Kirk walk, or use the non-exclusive tag on him and trade him or tag him this year only to have him walk next offseason. He's not going to sign your contract, and if he's not going to sign your lowball contract, just like last offseaon, he'll walk, be tagged again, be tagged and traded or be tagged with his year and walk next offseason.

You say you want Cousins to be our Qb, but you sound exactly like ascot McCloughan and the skins FO last offseason, you are lowballing him by at the least $20 million in guarantees and Kirk is not going to go for that because when he hits the open market he will get a contract that makes him the most expensive qb in the NFL - for how every long that is, could be days, weeks, months or a year until the next qb signs a bigger deal - no matter what you think he should sign, that doesn't matter, the truth is he's going to break contract records if he hits the open FA market because there's a handful of teams, including the skins that will be bidding on his services. Cousins knows this, he's smarter than you or I and most people about his own situation.

If he did hit free agency I have no doubt that the teeet that HTTTRG3 posted would be true from EB on the junkies when they had a former agent on their show a week ago:

@ebjunkies
Quote:
Wow. @corryjoel suggests on open market Kirk could potentially get $26.5+ mil per yr... $90 million guaranteed. Id want to leave too.
Kirk is going to bet on himself if the skins aren't going to coke close to this. Now, the deal can be structured in such a way that his cap hit for the next two seasons is lower than or right around what his cap hit was this year and then gets higher for the next 6 or 7 years after.


Turlte if you haven't notice by now, I dont care if he feels lowballed! I felt lowballed watching him against Dallas twice!! I felt lowballed watching him at home throw 2 picks against the Giants in a must win game! So yea once again take the deal or you will be traded or possibly Franchised again Mr Cousins!

Your thinking like the Eagles, Houston, and Miami. I'm thinking like SM of last year and Elway when he let Brock go to another team for more guranteed money only to be benched! It's no guarantee Cousins will succeed anywhere else! Its happen to plenty of guys in new systems. Guess your so one sided you cant see that. Long deal and he ends up being our Tony Romo, your gonna be happy with a QB who you cant count on in BIG GAMES and BIG Moments?


See bolded...

And yet, by Scot doing that, he not only DIDN'T help the team, but he then handed Kirk even MORE leverage over the team.

The second point invalidates your whole argument. Yes, Elway let Brock go.

...The SB winning team with a great defense...let Brock go..

And even though Brock got benched (for a time), Brock still led his team to the playoffs while the Broncos didn't make it (even with a good defense and arguably the best defensive player in the NFL).

Because even with that defense, that 7th rounder and the rookie were far inferior to Brock.


Thats your opinion not mine. We can agree to disagree.


Wait...its a matter of opinion that the Broncos let Brock go and Brock is now playing in the playoffs with the team he signed with and the Broncos missed the playoffs?


Can someone tell the NFL that? Laughing


You saying it didn't help the team is your opinion. Brock being the starting QB only because his replacement got hurt is a fact. You think Elway is mourning the loss of Brock right now? I surely don't! Texans made the playoffs more so because of their D not the big FA signing of Brock.
_________________


Last edited by 21 ALL THE WAY on Thu Jan 12, 2017 12:32 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
21 ALL THE WAY


Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Posts: 5901
Location: WASHINGTON DC
PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thaiphoon wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
MKnight82 wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
And for the umpteenth time I wouldn't sign him to a long term deal unless you consider 5 years with a option the 3rd year long term. Brady, Rodgers, Marino, Elway, Brees, Manning all made big plays when needed to get there team over the hump! Kirk had a bad game last year against the Packers in the playoffs and a bad game this year when it was a must win to get us in the playoffs. He's not in the class of Brady, Rodgers, Elway, Brees, or Manning when it comes down to decision making or trust going into a game compared to those guys in my book.
If teams only re-signed HOF QBs, no one would have any QBs.


I dont think I said I wouldn't resign him, I said I would only resign him for the right price. Brady making more or asking for more than 25 million per year? Think he's turned down plenty of chances to increase his salary but hasnt and still makes no names look like Greats!


So then he's a top 10 QB (not top 5). I can live with that. Doesn't mean that when he is a FA he's not going to command top dollar. Top 10 QBs don't become FAs too often. By all means, please identify the QB you would replace him with right now. Because he's not going to sign your lowball offer. And will instead force the tag and then leave next year. So you better be ready to:

A) Start over at QB
B) See A - then you're starting over on offense
C) See A - then you're not drafting a stud defensive player in the 1st this year
D) See A - no defensive FA is going to want to come to a team that is rebuilding on BOTH sides of the ball.

So, if you want this team to continue to suck. Lowball him.

If you want this team (not just at QB) to continue to get better, you sign him to a market rate contract that we can get out of in 3 years. That way our offensive players continue to grow and since we have a good offense, we can attrlact defensive players to shore up the defense...AND use our 2017 and 2018 early picks on defense instead of packaging them to move up to get a QB that may or may not flame out.

Nah...your way seems better. Let's get rid of him by lowballing him and giving him an offer no QB in his position would sign. Because I'm fairly certain that if the Redskins do that (lowball me with a ridiculous offer) again this year and I force them to tag me, I'm not going to come to the table this summer and work out a long term deal and will instead make plans to leave in 2018. And if that works out that way, I won't blame Cousins one bit.


Guess its no way we can get a pick for him from a team right?


Sure. Which team? And which pick? it has to be a top 3 pick if you're interested in not having to package up a ton of picks (that could be used to shore up our defense) to move up and grab a QB.

McCoy, Mccaron, and Jimmy G. I gave you three potential replacements. That's the answer to your question. You don't have to agree. It doesn't have to be a top pick in my book. Minnesota got a pick for Bradford and it wasn't a top 10 pick but it will damn sure help their team if used correctly.

And which QB do you want to take that is going to put us in the playoffs in 2017 with no run game and no defense? You've yet to identify this amorphous creature. So I'm basically daring you to identify him now. You want to let Kirk walk by lowballing him. Then identify the QB you've targeted as his replacement.

Upgrade the Defense through the draft and free agency. Build a TEAM where as so much pressure doesn't have to be on the QB. We have/had many weapons for Cousins to throw too!

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Who was the QB Elway had in place when Brock left?


Siemien. And they got Lynch (you know the 1st rounder). Neither one got them to the playoffs. So this doesn't actually help your case. It actually hurts it.

They had no one before Lynch but Seiman. Right now McCoy is our Seiman. We didn't get in with Kirk so why would we overpay for him to stay?

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
It doesn't matter who is at QB,


It actually does matter. As I and others have shown. And your own example you think proves your point actually completely invalidates it and proves mine.

In witch we can use as leverage with Kirk as well. Do you want to stay here or risk having to start completely over in a new system somewhere else. Not everyone has the same success once they leave. That's a point for us IMO.

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
I'm not overpaying just to keep this guy around! Let someone else do that.


You're keeping him on the team so the offensive players can continue to grow and get better as well as he can. You're keeping him on the team so you can focus on the defense. You're keeping him on the team so that you don't turn another position (QB) into a position of need. You're keeping him on the team because he operates the offense at a high level. You're keeping him on the team because you didn't make the playoffs last year and didn't have a winning record this year without him.

As for overpaying? You might have to get a little uncomfortable with the contract that Kirk will command this offseason. And the reason is the refusal to pony up the money last year and telling him to go out and do it again (which he did). You gambled. You lost. He is now worth more money per year than he was last offseason when I (and others) had clamored to sign him ong term. Scot gambled and lost. And now Kirk has the most leverage of any FA in the NFL right now.

You think I lost the gamble. I feel I won. Kirk you didn't get us back to the playoffs and had 2 costly INTs in your last must win game. Your offense ranked where in Redzone scoring? How many games did we loss because the offense started the season unable score unless by FG. How many Redzone InTs did you throw? You can tell me he didn't lose some power in negotiations by not getting us back to the playoffs but I will disagree. OK yes correct you pay him fairly to continue to build but you don't make it a We Must break the bank for Kirk Cousins to stay type thing.

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Just say you dont agree instead of making it seem like what I'm saying is completely impossible.


Not impossible. Highly improbable. Kirk would need to take leave of his senses to sign a lowball offer with as low a guaranteed amount as you've bandied about here (as low as $45M at one point, but it seems to have changed?)

So what is your contract you'd now offer?

Years
Total $
Guaranteed $

What is that you'd offer if you were the GM right now? I'm curious.

5 years 50 million guaranteed 100 million total. Signing day you get 35 million on spot. The rest of the guaranteed 15 million will be paid in the first two years of the deal. 50 million in two years is not a low ball offer.


21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
The Skins will continue to be a Franchise with or without Cousins.


Absolutely. Here we agree. But we'd also be a franchise that has regressed on both sides of the ball if we suddenly turn QB into a position of need and have to return to Snyder's early years. But you're right, they will continue to be "a franchise".

_________________


Last edited by 21 ALL THE WAY on Thu Jan 12, 2017 1:45 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
21 ALL THE WAY


Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Posts: 5901
Location: WASHINGTON DC
PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thaiphoon wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Kirk has been too 15 in ever my statistically qb category over the last two years and this year the only one he wasn't too 10 in was TD passes but there are a lot of reasons for that, some Kirk had control over, some he didn't. We've talked about them at nauseum!


Yes. No one cares he was basically the reason we won 8 games. They only want to cherry pick the games he wasn't good in. Which is their prerogative, I guess.

I don't mind taking him to task and taking some money away at the table for the last 2 home games. But to say he doesn't deserve market rate because of it (and thus ignoring his body of work for the entire season), is ridiculous and short sighted. And shows the people who are more worried about "winning the salary cap in 2016" than winning actual games in the next few years.


25 million for possibly 3 years is low balling him? How? Please just stay on that subject. How is paying 25 million a year to Kirk Cousins a low ball offer?


So you're suddenly now wanting to pay him $75M guaranteed? Since when? You keep wanting to pay him $45M guaranteed. When did this conversion take place?


No the 3rd year is a option. If he's playing like a 25 million dollar QB and we don't have something equvilant or better in year 3, we pick up the 3rd year option and he gets another year getting paid 25 million dollars!
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Marcus21


Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 1952
Location: North Carolina
PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 12:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Kirk has been too 15 in ever my statistically qb category over the last two years and this year the only one he wasn't too 10 in was TD passes but there are a lot of reasons for that, some Kirk had control over, some he didn't. We've talked about them at nauseum!


Yes. No one cares he was basically the reason we won 8 games. They only want to cherry pick the games he wasn't good in. Which is their prerogative, I guess.

I don't mind taking him to task and taking some money away at the table for the last 2 home games. But to say he doesn't deserve market rate because of it (and thus ignoring his body of work for the entire season), is ridiculous and short sighted. And shows the people who are more worried about "winning the salary cap in 2016" than winning actual games in the next few years.


25 million for possibly 3 years is low balling him? How? Please just stay on that subject. How is paying 25 million a year to Kirk Cousins a low ball offer?


So you're suddenly now wanting to pay him $75M guaranteed? Since when? You keep wanting to pay him $45M guaranteed. When did this conversion take place?


No the 3rd year is a option. If he's playing like a 25 million dollar QB and we don't have something equvilant or better in year 3, we pick up the 3rd year option and he gets another year getting paid 25 million dollars!


Why would We even offer a contract that is below market value? Kirk has all of the leverage. Would you take less money at your job when their competitor would pay you double?
Pay the man!!
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
21 ALL THE WAY


Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Posts: 5901
Location: WASHINGTON DC
PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 1:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Marcus21 wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
21 ALL THE WAY wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Kirk has been too 15 in ever my statistically qb category over the last two years and this year the only one he wasn't too 10 in was TD passes but there are a lot of reasons for that, some Kirk had control over, some he didn't. We've talked about them at nauseum!


Yes. No one cares he was basically the reason we won 8 games. They only want to cherry pick the games he wasn't good in. Which is their prerogative, I guess.

I don't mind taking him to task and taking some money away at the table for the last 2 home games. But to say he doesn't deserve market rate because of it (and thus ignoring his body of work for the entire season), is ridiculous and short sighted. And shows the people who are more worried about "winning the salary cap in 2016" than winning actual games in the next few years.


25 million for possibly 3 years is low balling him? How? Please just stay on that subject. How is paying 25 million a year to Kirk Cousins a low ball offer?


So you're suddenly now wanting to pay him $75M guaranteed? Since when? You keep wanting to pay him $45M guaranteed. When did this conversion take place?


No the 3rd year is a option. If he's playing like a 25 million dollar QB and we don't have something equvilant or better in year 3, we pick up the 3rd year option and he gets another year getting paid 25 million dollars!


Why would We even offer a contract that is below market value? Kirk has all of the leverage. Would you take less money at your job when their competitor would pay you double?
Pay the man!!


Do I want a ring, be comfortable in a system thay I know with players and coaches I trust and know or do I want money and possibly fail elsewhere? I want a chance at a ring and I'm remaining loyal to Jay Gruden for believing in me and giving me my chance to shine! I would love if my salary jump from his rookie deal to 20 million to 25 million a year!!! Hey if someone else offers more and he wants to go, just make sure your ready to give up a pick in a sign and trade. What is the issue with what I'm saying? Is it the money, is it the the 3rd year option, what's the issue? I want you to stay and be part of this success that has definitely shown and I will continue to grow. I do think Cousins earned that.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RSkinGM


Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 5900
Location: Richmond, Va
PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 9:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

turtle28 wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
RSkinGM wrote:
Yep, all the assets, all the tools, all the commiment to the offense and they , led by Capt Kirk can't score 14 stinking points to beat the Giants and get to the Playoffs .. AT HOME----------REALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!????????????????????????? Rolling Eyes


Yep. They left a steaming pile on the field. And yet, with no really good running game, Kirk led us to 8 wins. So if you're going to put the Giants game on his hotel bill (and I agree you should), you need to ALSO recognize we don't have 8 wins without him. Because with our poo poo run offense and our OL not being all that great and our defense historically bad, that doesn't point to a winning season. And yet, Kirk QB'ed us to two straight winning seasons for the first time in a very long time.

By all means though, please just focus on the last game...then lowball him and tag him (because you gave him an insulting offer like the 2015/2016 offseason) and run him out of town. I can't wait to return the the Redskins of Snyder's earlier years. I'm feeling nostalgic. Rolling Eyes
First time in 20 years we had back to back winning seasons and we would have been in the playoffs if our FG kicker didn't miss a 33 yarder vs Cincy.

Maybe that was Kirk's fault too ... or was it Norman's who I think had 50 penalty yards in that game just by himself and the kicker.


You're saying that tie kept us out? Wouldn't we have lost the tie breaker to Detroit since they beat us head to head ? Both would have had 9-7 records.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
turtle28


Joined: 21 Nov 2007
Posts: 81159
Location: MD/DC/VA depends on the hr!
PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RSkinGM wrote:
turtle28 wrote:
Thaiphoon wrote:
RSkinGM wrote:
Yep, all the assets, all the tools, all the commiment to the offense and they , led by Capt Kirk can't score 14 stinking points to beat the Giants and get to the Playoffs .. AT HOME----------REALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!????????????????????????? Rolling Eyes


Yep. They left a steaming pile on the field. And yet, with no really good running game, Kirk led us to 8 wins. So if you're going to put the Giants game on his hotel bill (and I agree you should), you need to ALSO recognize we don't have 8 wins without him. Because with our poo poo run offense and our OL not being all that great and our defense historically bad, that doesn't point to a winning season. And yet, Kirk QB'ed us to two straight winning seasons for the first time in a very long time.

By all means though, please just focus on the last game...then lowball him and tag him (because you gave him an insulting offer like the 2015/2016 offseason) and run him out of town. I can't wait to return the the Redskins of Snyder's earlier years. I'm feeling nostalgic. Rolling Eyes
First time in 20 years we had back to back winning seasons and we would have been in the playoffs if our FG kicker didn't miss a 33 yarder vs Cincy.

Maybe that was Kirk's fault too ... or was it Norman's who I think had 50 penalty yards in that game just by himself and the kicker.


You're saying that tie kept us out? Wouldn't we have lost the tie breaker to Detroit since they beat us head to head ? Both would have had 9-7 records.
Funny thing is - I know this is off topic, but we didn't lose the Det game bc of Cousins or either of the Dallas games solely bc of Cousins either. Defense lost those games, 1st Dallas game, D gave up the lead and vs Det D gave up the lead.

I thought if we had 9 wins we got in, but I could be wrong because the tie can act as a win or loss depending on tie breakers I guess.

That's not the real point here though. As Thai and others have said at nauseum, the goal is to be in place to compete for a championship soon, to do that you almost always need a top 10 qb - we have one. You keep that guy and build around them.

Making the playoffs was nearly pointless for the skins this year - kind of like last year - because we don't have he defense or the running game to win multiple games in the playoffs. All the teams that won down the stretch had their running games and defenses lead them on late season runs except the Packers with Rodgers but he's always an exception to the rule. Also, the teams that won last weekend - except for the Packers again - won because of a good running game and defense, well even the pack's D made plays. Last year our defense played a lot better in December than it had all last year and it forced a lot of turnovers, this year our D played worse in Dec than it had all year except for week 1 and 2.

That was the difference, so what do we need to fix? Not the qb positions, or the WR positions. We need to fix the defense, sign or draft a blocking TE to replace Paulsen - who we missed the last two years, cutting him for a #6 Wr was stupid - and sure up the interior OL.

We do that, bring back Cousins and we might be the best team in the division again and we'll have a home playoff game, maybe a bye.

You put an average defense and a running game like what Kelley did in the mid season with Kirk Cousins and this passing game we're not just talking playoffs.. PLAYOFFS??? ... we're talking a contender.
_________________
RIP SSFmike23md

"God made certain people to play football... Sean was one" JG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Washington Redskins All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 48, 49, 50 ... 98, 99, 100  Next
Page 49 of 100

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group