The FINAL Kirk Cousins Saga thread. 5.0

[MTK]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Couldn't the NFLPA protest, and Goodell and Co. act, on the basis that they were limiting a player's (Cousins) potential earnings, as well as going way beyond tampering to collusion with other teams?

If all sides are on board I’m not sure what there is to protest

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by MTK

If all sides are on board I’m not sure what there is to protest

I just don't think the Skins could get the NFLPA onboard with this. Too much opportunity for a team to threaten a player with the tag and lowball him this way. And abiding by the written rules hasn't stopped Goodell and Mara from penalizing us before...

[MTK]

There’s no rules against trading a tagged player, and if he becomes the highest paid player in the league by the Broncos I don’t see how there’s a chance to protest it

[HailGreen28]

More I think about it, Macro's proposal is a bad idea. Let's start with tagging Cousins. That doesn't just put him out of free agency, it puts the Skins out of free agency, because the Skins cap is squeezed even with "just" the nonexclusive or transition tag, let along the FT. So again, the Skins FO have no leverage, unless they want to screw themselves and Cousins out of spite.

And why should Cousins trust the Skins at this point?

Add to the NFLPA and league taking a dim view over this inventive way of using the tag, they might hit the Skins harder than they did in Capgate.

I'm sure there are other ways this proposed deal is doomed, those are just what I see.

[MTK]

Yeah maybe it's not so easy...

http://www.espn.com/blog/washington-...e-kirk-cousins

Franchise tag sign and trade: Because it would be a third franchise tag, according to the collective bargaining agreement it must be exclusive. That means only the Redskins can negotiate with Cousins. So, even during the legal tampering window before free agency, Cousins' agent would be unable to discuss contract numbers with other teams.

Yes, there are ways around that, but there are also ways to let other teams know this: Cousins won't agree to any wink-wink extension before free agency. Because of the restrictions, it would raise eyebrows in the league if there were a deal in the first minute of free agency that includes an extension.

[metalskins]

Originally Posted by Macro

Hi, I'm new here.
Re: Cousins future.

I believe a tag and trade is being worked upon and is the preferred method for Bruce and Dan.

Welcome Macro! I argued the same point before (although not as in much detail) and people scoffed at the idea of a tag and trade. Now, those people are like, "Hmmm, yeah, that could happen!" LOL! Of course, I think it was more realistic of happening prior to trading for Alex Smith. Now, I think it's awfully risky. And I think with some of the rules put in place by the NFLPA, it may not be as straight forward. And knowing the luck of this team, it would probably get dinged for tampering.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

More I think about it, Macro's proposal is a bad idea. Let's start with tagging Cousins. That doesn't just put him out of free agency, it puts the Skins out of free agency, because the Skins cap is squeezed even with "just" the nonexclusive or transition tag, let along the FT. So again, the Skins FO have no leverage, unless they want to screw themselves and Cousins out of spite.

And why should Cousins trust the Skins at this point?

Add to the NFLPA and league taking a dim view over this inventive way of using the tag, they might hit the Skins harder than they did in Capgate.

I'm sure there are other ways this proposed deal is doomed, those are just what I see.

I think you're misunderstanding what Macro is saying. He wouldn't apply the tag without first:

1) understanding that Cousins's destination of choice would be team A

2) understanding whether team A would be willing to part with draft picks or players or both

3) understanding that team A and Cousins are comfortable with the terms, given that they'll both want a long term resolution, not a short term one

If all of these conditions are not satisfied, the tag will not be applied in the first place.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I think you're misunderstanding what Macro is saying. He wouldn't apply the tag without first:

1) understanding that Cousins's destination of choice would be team A

2) understanding whether team A would be willing to part with draft picks or players or both

3) understanding that team A and Cousins are comfortable with the terms, given that they'll both want a long term resolution, not a short term one

If all of these conditions are not satisfied, the tag will not be applied in the first place.

1). Cousins can do that just fine in FA, with no risk from a deal like this.

2). Why would Cousins and his new team agree to hand the Skins draft picks or players? Unless the Skins try to leverage the tag in a way it's not supposed to be used. I can just hear Mara blubbering now about "the spirit of the tag".

3). Again, Cousins and team A can do that just fine in free agency themselves.

[diehardskin2982]

Loving the intelligent dialogue!

Marco, I agree with your thoughts. It would be necessary for Denver to pay a 3rd and Talib because the Redskins could trade him elsewhere.

There is a market for Cousins. I would argue that it's a stronger market than free agency because teams like the Jets, Bills, and Browns, who might not have had a realistic chance in free agency, can get him under the assumption that they can prove to KC that they'll be a long-term winner.

I do think the Eagles and Foles will be a factor. Foles is a Superbowl MVP, his price tag is less, and there will be a PR buzz for the team that takes him.

[metalskins]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I think you're misunderstanding what Macro is saying. He wouldn't apply the tag without first:

1) understanding that Cousins's destination of choice would be team A

2) understanding whether team A would be willing to part with draft picks or players or both

3) understanding that team A and Cousins are comfortable with the terms, given that they'll both want a long term resolution, not a short term one

If all of these conditions are not satisfied, the tag will not be applied in the first place.

Very same points I argued prior to the Alex Smith deal the other day. The assumption would be the Redskins already have a trade partner in place who has already agreed, in principle, on the details of the trade. But, Cousins would also have to be willing to go along with it, and I think this is where it would be tough.

However, now, with Alex Smith on board, I don't see it as likely. If it happens, it's a HUGE risk. Cousins would have to be willing and open to go along with it, and he hasn't shown any reason to want to help the Redskins unless he's actually starting quarterback.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by diehardskin2982

Loving the intelligent dialogue!

Marco, I agree with your thoughts. It would be necessary for Denver to pay a 3rd and Talib because the Redskins could trade him elsewhere.

There is a market for Cousins. I would argue that it's a stronger market than free agency because teams like the Jets, Bills, and Browns, who might not have had a realistic chance in free agency, can get him under the assumption that they can prove to KC that they'll be a long-term winner.

I do think the Eagles and Foles will be a factor. Foles is a Superbowl MVP, his price tag is less, and there will be a PR buzz for the team that takes him.

Foles said he wants to stay

[sdskinsfan2001]

I'm no Cousins fanboy, but let the man leave and get on with his life in FA. The juice isn't worth the squeeze.

We have plenty of cap space to sign a corner to replace Fuller or we can draft one. And we can acquire more picks in more traditional fashions.

Time for all sides to move on.

All Cousins has to do to blow this up is say that he won't sign the tag right away or sign tag immediately and tell all the other 31 teams he's leaving in FA in 2019.

[BaltimoreSkins]

Aqib Talib has a 12 mill cap hit but only 1 mill dead cap for 2018.
a. Is 12 mil too much to pay Talib or would there be a negotiated contract?
b. Could we pick up Talib for less than 12 mil if he gets cut by the Broncos? IMO we could.

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

Aqib Talib has a 12 mill cap hit but only 1 mill dead cap for 2018.
a. Is 12 mil too much to pay Talib or would there be a negotiated contract?
b. Could we pick up Talib for less than 12 mil if he gets cut by the Broncos? IMO we could.

I hope we do, that would be sick to have him and Norman together, I don't see Breeland coming back

[sandtrapjack]

None of this makes any sense.

As soon as they place the tag on Cousins, it counts against the salary cap. Cousins does not need to sign his tender for it to count. As soon as they tag him, it counts. The number for the tag is in the neighborhood of 34.5 million. And last check I saw was Washington is 32 million under the cap. Teams are required to be under the salary cap before the start of the new league year, March 14. Additionally, Cousins cannot be traded until he signs that tender. So tagging him would hamstring the organization in free agency.

Why would a team willingly enter into negotiations regarding a trade of a player they KNOW will be a free agent? They know that worst case scenario is they tag KC. If KC does not sign the tag, he is a Free Agent. If KC signs the tag, everyone knows Washington will rescind the tag at the start of the new league year.