Kirk Cousins 24/7 thread

[mooby]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c5f64dafa5a0

Interesting tidbit from this writer is that he feels one of the scenarios is that the Redskins decline to match another team's offer on Cousins, but are compensated with two first round draft picks. I did not think the Redskins valued Cousins high enough to warrant two first round picks.

This article seems to believe that we franchise him again at 24 million, which means he walks in 2018 because i believe you can not use the tag three consecutive times in a row.

Don't want to rain on your parade but you can use it 3 times in a row, not 4 times in a row though. Next year his tag would be 34 million.

[metalskins]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c5f64dafa5a0

Interesting tidbit from this writer is that he feels one of the scenarios is that the Redskins decline to match another team's offer on Cousins, but are compensated with two first round draft picks. I did not think the Redskins valued Cousins high enough to warrant two first round picks.

This article seems to believe that we franchise him again at 24 million, which means he walks in 2018 because i believe you can not use the tag three consecutive times in a row.

It's the nature of how the nonexclusive tag works. It doesn't have to be two number one picks though. The team that has the tagged player can negotiate a deal where it might be some lower draft picks and a trade or something like that. For instance, let's say that now that the Chargers are moving to LA, Phillip Rivers may not want to play in LA (he's stated such before from what I've read.) Let's say he demands to be traded to another team. Could be a scenario where the Redskins are willing to not match an offer that the Chargers would put in for Kirk Cousins and in exchange, the Redskins get Phillip Rivers and a couple 3rd round picks. It would be a win-win situation. The Redskins would get a quarterback who is a proven franchise quarterback, and some draft picks, Chargers would get a potential franchise quarterback who wants to play for any team willing to pay for him. It doesn't have to automatically be two number one picks with the nonexclusive tag.

Not saying this is likely to happen, but honestly, I've felt that if the Redskins cut Cousins loose, it would only be in a situation where they land an established franchise quarterback who could essentially pick up from where Cousins left it, keep the trajectory heading upward for the Redskins rebuild, and allow Scot McCloughan to continue focusing on building the defense. Phillip Rivers still has several good years left in him, and I think he's wasting his career with the Chargers. Having said that, I don't see this scenario being likely at all, but just to give you an example of how the nonexclusive tag could work. I'm all in favor of keeping Cousins as I think he has potential of being a franchise quarterback for several years to come. And yes, you can tag a quarterback three years in a row, with that third year, he receivers a 44% raise over the cap number of the previous year. You can't tag a non-quarterback three years in a row though.

[SolidSnake84]

Originally Posted by metalskins

It's the nature of how the nonexclusive tag works. It doesn't have to be two number one picks though. The team that has the tagged player can negotiate a deal where it might be some lower draft picks and a trade or something like that. For instance, let's say that now that the Chargers are moving to LA, Phillip Rivers may not want to play in LA (he's stated such before from what I've read.) Let's say he demands to be traded to another team. Could be a scenario where the Redskins are willing to not match an offer that the Chargers would put in for Kirk Cousins and in exchange, the Redskins get Phillip Rivers and a couple 3rd round picks. It would be a win-win situation. The Redskins would get a quarterback who is a proven franchise quarterback, and some draft picks, Chargers would get a potential franchise quarterback who wants to play for any team willing to pay for him. It doesn't have to automatically be two number one picks with the nonexclusive tag.

Not saying this is likely to happen, but honestly, I've felt that if the Redskins cut Cousins loose, it would only be in a situation where they land an established franchise quarterback who could essentially pick up from where Cousins left it, keep the trajectory heading upward for the Redskins rebuild, and allow Scot McCloughan to continue focusing on building the defense. Phillip Rivers still has several good years left in him, and I think he's wasting his career with the Chargers. Having said that, I don't see this scenario being likely at all, but just to give you an example of how the nonexclusive tag could work. I'm all in favor of keeping Cousins as I think he has potential of being a franchise quarterback for several years to come. And yes, you can tag a quarterback three years in a row, with that third year, he receivers a 44% raise over the cap number of the previous year. You can't tag a non-quarterback three years in a row though.

Thanks for explaining that. I still think it's silly that our main issue with Cousins is that we don't want to pay him, but yet they are okay with (continuing) to tag him, potentially two more times, which means he only gets paid by us more and more on one year deals. Crazy, to me. You tag him again this year because you have no replacement option, and then next year he starts his negotiations at 34 million....

[metalskins]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

Thanks for explaining that. I still think it's silly that our main issue with Cousins is that we don't want to pay him, but yet they are okay with (continuing) to tag him, potentially two more times, which means he only gets paid by us more and more on one year deals. Crazy, to me. You tag him again this year because you have no replacement option, and then next year he starts his negotiations at 34 million....

It's one of those situations where you couldn't really predict the future. Last year, had the Redskins decided to be aggressive in getting a long term deal done, it would have cost less, but they would have essentially been the ones gambling on one half of a good season. Had this year proven that the latter half of 2015 was all smoke and mirrors, you're now stuck with a QB (ala' Brock Osweiler) who will have set you back because he isn't as advertised.

Now, the Redskins are free to start negotiating with Cousins now, but unless they offer him exactly what he wants, it's going to be a fruitless negotiation. Even if the Redskins do offer Cousins exactly what he's asking for, then his agent is just going to say, that he wants to see if other teams are willing to beat that offer. The Redskins want to tag Cousins to avoid a bidding war. The only question is, nonexclusive tag verses exclusive.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

Thanks for explaining that. I still think it's silly that our main issue with Cousins is that we don't want to pay him, but yet they are okay with (continuing) to tag him, potentially two more times, which means he only gets paid by us more and more on one year deals. Crazy, to me. You tag him again this year because you have no replacement option, and then next year he starts his negotiations at 34 million....

Can you show any public statement by the Redskins that says they don't want to pay him? Not anonymous sources, or even beat writers, an official statement.

[Chief X_Phackter]

I may be mistaken, but if they tag him again I think they will already be about 2/3 of the way to what he was asking for last year in guaranteed money. It doesn't seem like a good business decision to me. Yeah, you get him for one more year, but it makes even less sense to tag him again next year, from a $$$$$ perspective - and if I were him I would get the fuck out of here and try to find an organization that will appreciate how good he is. For fucks sake what else does he have to prove here? Give him an above average defense and it's a wrap...

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

I may be mistaken, but if they tag him again I think they will already be about 2/3 of the way to what he was asking for last year in guaranteed money. It doesn't seem like a good business decision to me. Yeah, you get him for one more year, but it makes even less sense to tag him again next year, from a $$$$$ perspective - and if I were him I would get the fuck out of here and try to find an organization that will appreciate how good he is. For fucks sake what else does he have to prove here? Give him an above average defense and it's a wrap...

Last year I got their decision to make him prove it again. Now, looking back on it, it feels ridiculous that we thought that way. But he had only been a strong QB for 9 games. I'm glad they took the approach they did.

But the risk of doing that, which was completely understood at the time, was that if he balled out in 2016 his negotiating position would be incredibly strong. And now it is. We're going to have to come up to $22 or $23M per year with lots guaranteed. He bet on himself and his number hit. What more can you say, just gotta pay the man.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Last year I got their decision to make him prove it again. Now, looking back on it, it feels ridiculous that we thought that way. But he had only been a strong QB for 9 games. I'm glad they took the approach they did.

But the risk of doing that, which was completely understood at the time, was that if he balled out in 2016 his negotiating position would be incredibly strong. And now it is. We're going to have to come up to $22 or $23M per year with lots guaranteed. He bet on himself and his number hit. What more can you say, just gotta pay the man.

Gotta say I think it's incredible that we even have to have this debate. The man ain't no A-A-ron Rodgers but he's good enough to win with a good team around him. That easily makes him better than any qb we've had since Rypien not named Brad Johnson. Just pay the man. Find the line between giving him the money he deserves and not screwing the rest of the team.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by mooby

Gotta say I think it's incredible that we even have to have this debate. The man ain't no A-A-ron Rodgers but he's good enough to win with a good team around him. That easily makes him better than any qb we've had since Rypien not named Brad Johnson. Just pay the man. Find the line between giving him the money he deserves and not screwing the rest of the team.

Until we get to the point where the Skins and KC can negotiate again (which I think is after the SB, but maybe is now) and we start hearing serious hesitation by the front office, I am 100% of the opinion that all this debate is spurred on by fans who worry, or give credence to bogus sources.

The Skins will have KC signed before the FT question even comes into play is my opinion.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Until we get to the point where the Skins and KC can negotiate again (which I think is after the SB, but maybe is now) and we start hearing serious hesitation by the front office, I am 100% of the opinion that all this debate is spurred on by fans who worry, or give credence to bogus sources.

The Skins will have KC signed before the FT question even comes into play is my opinion.

I agree. The cap space is abundant this year, and they have very little committed in future years. They can afford to marry themselves to Cousins for 3 years via a big guaranteed payday.

At this point I think it's likely that McC and Gruden have both given their thumbs up and it's now into the hands of Allen and Schaeffer to negotiate the best deal possible.

[metalskins]

Originally Posted by Chief X_Phackter

I may be mistaken, but if they tag him again I think they will already be about 2/3 of the way to what he was asking for last year in guaranteed money. It doesn't seem like a good business decision to me. Yeah, you get him for one more year, but it makes even less sense to tag him again next year, from a $$$$$ perspective - and if I were him I would get the fuck out of here and try to find an organization that will appreciate how good he is. For fucks sake what else does he have to prove here? Give him an above average defense and it's a wrap...

The more I think about this, the more complicated it is. The Redskins almost have to tag Cousins this year, if they want to keep him long term. Because, Cousins is going to take the best offer. He is not loyal to sticking with the Redskins if they can't offer him the best deal. The Redskins have already paid him $20M in guaranteed money. So, they tag him again, they're paying him $44M in guaranteed money for last year and this year. I think last year, Cousins was wanting something close to $20M/year with about $60M guaranteed. So, you tag him again, he's getting just $16M shy of his original asking price of $60M guaranteed.

So, if you're the Redskins, you probably slap the exclusive franchise tag on him so that he can't negotiate with other teams, and hope you can negotiate a contract where he can get about $30M guaranteed this year, which would be a total of about $50M guaranteed money with what he got last year. The biggest thing would be to negotiate on the yearly base salary. In the end, the Redskins would wind up giving Cousins basically what he was asking for last year with a bit more per year, which is probably the best deal the Redskins could get. I have a feeling though, that yearly salary would probably go up. It would just wind up being a case where the Redskins were willing to give Cousins what he wanted all long (with somewhat of an increase), but they just wanted one more year out of him to make sure he was worth it.

If the 'skins decide to do the nonexclusive tag on Cousins, then that's a big gamble. The upside is that they could see, exactly, what other teams think of Cousins' worth, which would help to decide what type of contract the Redskins must offer Cousins if they want to keep him. If they don't match, they get two first rounders or whatever else is negotiated. At least the Redskins would not leave the table empty handed. The bad news is, if the plan all along is to keep Cousins no matter what, then if a team says they will give Cousins $26/yr with $65M guaranteed, then if the 'skins want to match that, you're looking at having to pay Cousins $85M in guaranteed money (with the tag cost from the previous year), in addition to what his base salary is going to cost. So, all in all, the Redskins will have wound up giving Cousins much more than what Cousins was asking for last year - and as far as the money side of it goes, the Redskins will have gambled and lost.

So, basically, I'm saying that the Redskins are tagging Cousins. If they tag him as exclusive, then that tells me they really want to keep him and negotiate a long term deal. Probably highly likely. If they tag him nonexclusive, they're probably hoping the right team will come by (maybe one that happens to have a franchise quarterback who is unhappy with the team) to offer the right deal that gives the Redskins what they need in order to be OK with moving on from Kirk Cousins. I see this is not very likely, but not out of the realm of possibility.

No tag whatsoever means they're either going to gamble big and hope that Cousins comes down to earth on what he's asking for, or that they already have plans to move on from him and draft a guy they hope has a higher ceiling. I don't see this happening at all. I think the Redskins want Kirk Cousins long term. I think they just want an opportunity to hold negotiations on a level playing field, and tagging him is about the only way to do it.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by metalskins

The more I think about this, the more complicated it is. The Redskins almost have to tag Cousins this year, if they want to keep him long term. Because, Cousins is going to take the best offer. He is not loyal to sticking with the Redskins if they can't offer him the best deal. The Redskins have already paid him $20M in guaranteed money. So, they tag him again, they're paying him $44M in guaranteed money for last year and this year. I think last year, Cousins was wanting something close to $20M/year with about $60M guaranteed. So, you tag him again, he's getting just $16M shy of his original asking price of $60M guaranteed.

So, if you're the Redskins, you probably slap the exclusive franchise tag on him so that he can't negotiate with other teams, and hope you can negotiate a contract where he can get about $30M guaranteed this year, which would be a total of about $50M guaranteed money with what he got last year. The biggest thing would be to negotiate on the yearly base salary. In the end, the Redskins would wind up giving Cousins basically what he was asking for last year with a bit more per year, which is probably the best deal the Redskins could get. I have a feeling though, that yearly salary would probably go up. It would just wind up being a case where the Redskins were willing to give Cousins what he wanted all long (with somewhat of an increase), but they just wanted one more year out of him to make sure he was worth it.

If the 'skins decide to do the nonexclusive tag on Cousins, then that's a big gamble. The upside is that they could see, exactly, what other teams think of Cousins' worth, which would help to decide what type of contract the Redskins must offer Cousins if they want to keep him. If they don't match, they get two first rounders or whatever else is negotiated. At least the Redskins would not leave the table empty handed. The bad news is, if the plan all along is to keep Cousins no matter what, then if a team says they will give Cousins $26/yr with $65M guaranteed, then if the 'skins want to match that, you're looking at having to pay Cousins $85M in guaranteed money (with the tag cost from the previous year), in addition to what his base salary is going to cost. So, all in all, the Redskins will have wound up giving Cousins much more than what Cousins was asking for last year - and as far as the money side of it goes, the Redskins will have gambled and lost.

So, basically, I'm saying that the Redskins are tagging Cousins. If they tag him as exclusive, then that tells me they really want to keep him and negotiate a long term deal. Probably highly likely. If they tag him nonexclusive, they're probably hoping the right team will come by (maybe one that happens to have a franchise quarterback who is unhappy with the team) to offer the right deal that gives the Redskins what they need in order to be OK with moving on from Kirk Cousins. I see this is not very likely, but not out of the realm of possibility.

No tag whatsoever means they're either going to gamble big and hope that Cousins comes down to earth on what he's asking for, or that they already have plans to move on from him and draft a guy they hope has a higher ceiling. I don't see this happening at all. I think the Redskins want Kirk Cousins long term. I think they just want an opportunity to hold negotiations on a level playing field, and tagging him is about the only way to do it.

I don't know man, it's all a gamble. At this point, to me the franchise tags (either one) are the biggest gambles. They slapped the non-exclusive tag on him last year and he just signed it and took the 20 mil - betting on himself (WIN). I suspect he would do that again this year, knowing it's very unlikely the tag would be used a third time. Then he'll pack up his 45 mil and go get a giant contract elsewhere. Now is the time to lock him up - long term. Use the tag on someone else, PG, DS...

[Schneed10]

It's an absolute lock that they'll tag him. I doubt anybody would sign him to a deal knowing they'd have to give up two 1sts. Stranger things have happened I guess, but I don't see it.

He'll either play under the tag this year as a Redskin, or he'll have a long term deal to be here for a while.

[metalskins]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

It's an absolute lock that they'll tag him. I doubt anybody would sign him to a deal knowing they'd have to give up two 1sts. Stranger things have happened I guess, but I don't see it.

He'll either play under the tag this year as a Redskin, or he'll have a long term deal to be here for a while.

I believe that as well. I don't think any team (including the Browns) would give up two first rounders for Cousins either. The only scenario that would make sense to me involving the nonexclusive, and one I used as an example earlier, would be in the case of the Chargers (or whoever they plan to be called later on lol), and Phillip Rivers not wanting to go down with that ship. Maybe complains enough to where he wants a trade, and the Redskins work out some sort of trade for Kirk Cousins. But other than that, I honestly believe the Redskins main intent is to get Cousins signed. Maybe I'm wrong and they'll get him signed the day after the Super Bowl. That would be great!

[warriorzpath]

Kirk Cousins's ceiling right now appears to be Alex Smith. And the Chiefs were the most complete team to me in the playoffs.

What does that mean for you with Kirk Cousins leading the Redskins?