The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Prowl33 wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:Cousins wanted an opportunity to earn a good deal for himself ... there's still 10 games left

At this point if he just played the rest of the year like he has so far, if we don't pay him 20+ million, someone else will. Bears, jets, someone. I'd almost rather overpay a little for him to beat out other teams, than start over with yet another rookie and go through the mental turmoil of the unknown for years again

Exactly. I honestly don't know what SkinsJock is expecting at this point. The guy is 4-2 as our starting QB so far this year. That's good enough for me.

markshark84 wrote:I have heard a number of arguments about how much you pay a QB vs. winning SBs and while I can understand the argument, it is FAR FAR worse to give up draft picks than overpay a QB by a couple million.

GREAT point.

fortunately, by the time the season is over the FO will make the right decision for the franchise going forward

I don't see any way that they let a good NFL QB get away - Cousins has 10 games left


totally agree that there are a lot of good NFL QBs not playing up to their capabilities right now but Cousins has not shown that he should be getting $20M+ like he wanted either ...

I'm looking forward to the next 10 games - it's a win/win for me ... Cousins gets a huge payday or we get started on finding our next good NFL QB

SkinsJock wrote:I'm looking forward to the next 10 games - it's a win/win for me ... Cousins gets a huge payday or we get started on finding our next good NFL QB

blah blah blah.

SkinsJock wrote:

Prowl33 wrote: ... right now I'll take kirk over 75% of the qbs in the league.

Do you think this franchise should have signed Cousins to the long term deal he was looking for?

or

Do you think we made a mistake paying him $19M to play this season so he could show he was worth a lot more?

or

Do you think we're going to have to pay Cousins $20M plus per season to keep him based on what we've seen this far?

I think these are all easy answers, but they prove very little. The fact Scot franchised him was an economic decision with risk management tied in.

They shouldn't have signed him to a long-term deal because the franchise tag was the best option -- both financially and based on the fact Cousins hadn't fully proven himself. However, if the franchise tag didn't exist, I can guarantee would have signed him to a deal similar to Osweilers, but instead of 17M per year, it would have been 20 or 21 per year. And the only reason I mention this is merely to say that if Scot was forced to chose, he would have signed him (at least I think so) --- but used the franchise tag because it was available and the best option financially. Now, whether Cousins would have accepted a long term deal is another story.

The franchise tag was a great move. I don't think that is debateable. We are paying him LESS than market and less than he would have made under a long-term contract. On top of that, we delayed paying him a signing bonus that would have been more than his entire 2016 salary. That ties into time-value of money. As an owner, I would much rather pay him $19M this year vs. paying him an approx. $25M+ signing bonus plus another $20M in salary. And it saves about 5M off the cap hit. The only downside is if Cousins was offended by it and makes us pay next year by re-entering the FA market and forcing us to pay market + 10%.

And yes, so far we will. He is 6th in passing yards, 10th in TDs, and I expect his QBR to be closer to the 10-12 range by the end of the year. If these stats stay in this range, the price tag will be NORTH of $20M (when considering the market and cap increase). Especially considering the fact teams with tons of space next season include CLE, SF, and DEN, there would be competition.

As far as the 75% comment by Prowl33: if you mean 75% of starters, than means he'd be the 8th best QB in the NFL. I am not so sure about that. Right now, I'd take Brady, Luck, Roeth, Wilson, Rodgers, Newton, Brees, Stafford, Rivers, Ryan, and possibly Carr and Dalton --- over Cousins. That still puts him close to the top 1/3rd but not top 25%.

Prowl33 wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:Cousins wanted an opportunity to earn a good deal for himself ... there's still 10 games left

At this point if he just played the rest of the year like he has so far, if we don't pay him 20+ million, someone else will. Bears, jets, someone. I'd almost rather overpay a little for him to beat out other teams, than start over with yet another rookie and go through the mental turmoil of the unknown for years again

I think at this point it is just a matter of preference by the fan.

Irn-Bru wrote:

mastdark81 wrote:[In response to Irn-BRU]

Sorry I meant Flacco haven't won since 2012.

Peyton took a significant paycut when he won
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/1242 ... y-cut-2015

and Cam Newton lost so he don't count haha.

Well that's why I didn't include Peyton in my original list: he did take a pay cut the year before they won the Super Bowl. But since you brought up Super Bowl appearances (versus wins only) I thought it was only fair to mention 2013 Peyton and Cam Newton.

I think it still can be said that MOST don't win a Super Bowl.

Since there are 31 teams every year that don't win a Super Bowl, and about 27-28 teams that don't win it in any five-year window, then it can be said that MOST teams that do X — for any X whatsoever — don't win a Super Bowl. It's not a very meaningful statement, IMHO.

Division championships don't matter therefore I will never include or be satisfied with that nor even a Super Bowl appearance. I get your point though and it makes since only if you measure by just having "success" but the game is the win it all.

By this same argument, one could argue that it really doesn't matter what a team pays a QB, since the only thing that matters is winning a Super Bowl.

The moment you start looking for cause and effect, you have to start trying to measure "success" by some other metric than just "who won on Sunday?" The whole point is to understand why someone wins.

You are doing this when you look at how much teams spend on QBs. What I'm doing is just another way of looking at it. Both by necessity have to analyze factors beyond "who won the SB?" So if you really think that is, literally, the only thing that matters, then it's pointless even to look at little stats like the percentage of salary cap eaten up by QBs. The only stat you should care about is who scored more points in one particular game — how the teams got there is irrelevant, according to your own argument.

Naw this is a message board so I have the right to look at trends or not the way that I want to for discussion purposes. I felt that I found a trend that I wanted to bring up. The goal of the team may be to just make money and have some success but my goal for the team is for them to win a Super Bowl. So I took a look at only data from that portion. My suggested trends were not 100% factual as you stated. There are always an exception to every thing and that is why we are in the forum to add our replies and have intelligent conversation on the Redskins. At the end of the day I don't think he is the guy you pay and I'm not sure your thoughts but time will tell. Hard to gauge either way if we pay him if that extra lil cash makes a difference or not b/c of the different variables here and there like success of draft, signings.

markshark84 wrote:

Prowl33 wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:Cousins wanted an opportunity to earn a good deal for himself ... there's still 10 games left

At this point if he just played the rest of the year like he has so far, if we don't pay him 20+ million, someone else will. Bears, jets, someone. I'd almost rather overpay a little for him to beat out other teams, than start over with yet another rookie and go through the mental turmoil of the unknown for years again

That is correct. If he continues on the same pace he is currently for the remainder of the year, he is hovering around being a top 10 QB in the NFL. When players like that hit the market at the QB position, they tend to go in the $18-20M range. And with the salary cap going up another 10+M next season, it may be in the $20-22M range. I could easily see CHI, NYJ, CLE, DEN, or SF dropping that kind on money on him --- no question about that.

I also agree that I would rather have Cousins over an unknown rookie QB. And based on our current roster, we need our top draft picks to fill needs at other positions --- NT, DEs, C, OG, S, and depending on what happens: WR and TE. This team can't afford to take a QB in R1 or R2 (which is when they'd need to). It also goes without saying that we can't afford to trade up...... And the likelihood is that we would have a mid-round or possible late round selection depending on how the rest of the year goes --- and with CLE, SF, CHI, and NYJ looking to be 4 of the top 8 picks, trading up would be a necessity to lock a "top 3" QB pick.

I have heard a number of arguments about how much you pay a QB vs. winning SBs and while I can understand the argument, it is FAR FAR worse to give up draft picks than overpay a QB by a couple million.

There won't be a major market for Cousins unless one of our current coaches or past coaches is inserted at a team. We forget alot of GMs are still not sold on Cousins as a franchise guy. I think most felt that this was the best qb for this team but wasn't really sold he could be the guy that get the team over the hump and elevate their players.

I feel most of the teams that you mention will be in position to draft a quarterback instead of going for a free agent. Jets could definitely be a location I feel because they have expressed interest before, but it really depends on who's the coach and if the gm is still there.

mastdark81 wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:Since there are 31 teams every year that don't win a Super Bowl, and about 27-28 teams that don't win it in any five-year window, then it can be said that MOST teams that do X — for any X whatsoever — don't win a Super Bowl. It's not a very meaningful statement, IMHO.

The goal of the team may be to just make money and have some success but my goal for the team is for them to win a Super Bowl. So I took a look at only data from that portion.

I-B's point makes your argument moot.

markshark84 wrote:

Prowl33 wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:Cousins wanted an opportunity to earn a good deal for himself ... there's still 10 games left

At this point if he just played the rest of the year like he has so far, if we don't pay him 20+ million, someone else will. Bears, jets, someone. I'd almost rather overpay a little for him to beat out other teams, than start over with yet another rookie and go through the mental turmoil of the unknown for years again

That is correct. If he continues on the same pace he is currently for the remainder of the year, he is hovering around being a top 10 QB in the NFL. When players like that hit the market at the QB position, they tend to go in the $18-20M range. And with the salary cap going up another 10+M next season, it may be in the $20-22M range. I could easily see CHI, NYJ, CLE, DEN, or SF dropping that kind on money on him --- no question about that.

I agree, and all of this helps me appreciate the wisdom of the FO this past offseason. Given how hot Cousins was, we couldn't have signed him for anything less than $20M, which is what we're looking at anyway given a less amazing — but still good — performance this season. So we haven't lost anything, really, yet we gained the ability to evaluate him for an entire year and make sure he could give us a repeat performance. Plus our options are open, since he isn't locked into a deal yet.

Anyone have stats on cousins from first 6 gamessage this year vs first 6 last year?

Prowl33 wrote:Anyone have stats on cousins from first 6 gamessage this year vs first 6 last year?

Here: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/p ... 2=CousKi00

all I'm pointing out is that Cousins turned down a good long term deal because he felt that he could get a great deal

fact - we are 4-2 and could be/should be 5-1 - Cousins is not playing as well as he did in 2015
fact - there are many other NFL QBs that are not playing well or up to what we have come to expect - this could be good for Cousins

he has 10 games left to get a great deal or to get a good deal - so far, he's not getting a great deal but he can do better

I think that both Cousins and the FO guys are happy - the FO wanted to take a chance to see what they really have and Cousins is thinking that he'll benefit from a lack of quality competition as far as starting QBs are concerned

no matter what, while Scot is the GM, this franchise is not giving players contracts that they will later regret

If Cousins continues to play as he has or shows that he's the best alternative, he will get a good contract because of the marketplace

Could be/should be? WTF does that even mean or matter? We could also be 0-6, but our QB is playing good enough that we're 4-2.

SIMPLE - Cousins can play better than he has - if he'd played as well as he did in 2015 we would have won the game against the pukes

I'm not as gaga about Cousins as some here but I'm sure that Scot is not letting him walk if he proves what he's worth in these next 10 games - unlike baseball, Cousins next contract is not based on what he's done, it will be based on what he's worth in the future

Cousins can play better than he has shown these past 6 games - be good to see him do that in these next 10 games

Cousins wanted a chance to prove that he was worth $20M+ - he has not done that yet

SkinsJock wrote:I'm not as gaga about Cousins as some here but I'm sure that Scot is not letting him walk if he proves what he's worth in these next 10 games - unlike baseball, Cousins next contract is not based on what he's done, it will be based on what he's worth in the future

Cousins can play better than he has shown these past 6 games - be good to see him do that in these next 10 games

Cousins wanted a chance to prove that he was worth $20M+ - he has not done that yet

Cousins is Top 10 by wins: 11 teams in the league are 4-2 or better thus far this season.

Cousins is 6th in Attempts, Completions, and Yards.

Cousins is now #10 in passing touchdowns.

Cousins is 7th in net yards per pass attempt.

Cousins is 6th in completions per game.

Cousins is #2 in game winning drives (2) and comebacks (2).

Cousins is #6 in total offense.

You're not gaga about him? He can play better? What in the hell games are you watching?

Also, Cousins was not trying to prove he's a $20MM a year quarterback since no QB in the league makes that.

Cousins was trying to maximize his guaranteed income, like any intelligent player would do.

If the team was willing to guarantee him $19.95MM for one season he was willing to take it.

Andrew Luck signed a 5 year deal with $87MM guaranteed. Pay attention to the word "guaranteed." That's an annual average of $17.4MM.

The next multi-year contract player is Joe Flacco with $44MM guaranteed over three years. That's an annual average of $14.67MM.

Those are the two highest dollar value quarterback contracts signed in 2016.

Your claim that Kirk Cousins was or is seeking more money than a #1 overall pick and a Super Bowl winner is complete nonsense.

It's simple economics. $15MM a year makes Cousins $6MM less than $17MM a year over a three year contract. Obviously he wants the higher amount.

$17MM a year allows the Redskins to use $2MM a year improving other parts of the roster over paying Cousins $19MM a year. Obviously the team wants the additional cap space.

Typically I ignore posts such as these, however in this instance I made an exception because you're 100% talking out of your ass.

Cousins is playing like a top six quarterback in this league and the team isn't going to wait until he's an unrestricted free agent to pay the man.

Cousins wouldn't last ten minutes on the open market. There's a zero percent chance Scot McCloughan "let's him walk." ZERO.

SkinsJock wrote:fact - we are 4-2 and could be/should be 5-1 - Cousins is not playing as well as he did in 2015

Um, that's not entirely true. He may not be playing as well as he did at the end of the 2015 season, but he's playing better than he did in the first 6 games of 2015. Let's wait to see if he has steady improvement this year similar to what he had in 2015 before we start stating he's not playing as well as a fact.

what Cousins did in the past 6 games will mean nothing if he does not play well in these next 10 games

it's true that Cousins has played better than a lot of other QBs but the fact remains he has not played at a level commensurate with what he wanted the franchise to give him in a long term contract - at this time, Cousins is more likely to get a good deal next season because the other good QB have played badly, not because he's shown that he's worth what he wanted in a long term deal

Cousins has 10 games - Scot is not letting a good QB go but he's not paying Cousins stupid money either

this is a win/win deal - Cousins shows he's a top tier QB & gets a great deal or we keep him at a good rate for him & for the franchise

SkinsJock wrote:I'm not as gaga about Cousins as some here

Because he's the one that dethroned Griffin.

That's the sole reason for your increasingly negative posts about Cousins.

Deadskins wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:fact - we are 4-2 and could be/should be 5-1 - Cousins is not playing as well as he did in 2015

Um, that's not entirely true. He may not be playing as well as he did at the end of the 2015 season, but he's playing better than he did in the first 6 games of 2015. Let's wait to see if he has steady improvement this year similar to what he had in 2015 before we start stating he's not playing as well as a fact.

let me clarify - Cousins' QB play in the last 6 games has not been as good as it was at the end of 2015 - there have been questionable decisions on his part and some throws that were not up to the standard that he showed he can make at the end of 2015

Cousins value (at this time) is better because of what other QBs are doing than what he himself has shown

he has 10 games to prove that he's worth a lot of money or that he's the best 'option' for us going forward



this franchise is still winning 8 or 9 games ... as long as Cousins continues to improve

StorminMormon86 wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:I'm not as gaga about Cousins as some here

Because he's the one that dethroned Griffin. That's the sole reason for your increasingly negative posts about Cousins.

to use the words of another poster here "you're 100% talking out of your ass" ... as usual

I'm not negative about Cousins I just want to see him play at the level he played at the end of last season

and

at the level that he thinks he's worth

apparently I'm not the only one that thinks that Cousins has some improving to do ....

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/agent ... tony-romo/

Cousins playing on his $19.953 million non-exclusive franchise tag was a no brainer considering Washington's reported best offer was $16 million per year with $24 million in guarantees. The Redskins aren't any closer to knowing whether Cousins is worthy of a substantial long-term financial commitment six games into the 2016 season because of inconsistency he didn't display during the second half of the 2015 season.
Cousins completed 73.6 percent of his passes for 2,212 yards with 19 touchdowns and two interceptions to post a 126.1 passer rating over the final eight regular season games in 2015. He had the highest completion percentage and the third-best passer rating during a second half of a season since the turn of century.
Getting to the playoffs for a second straight season with Cousins could force the Redskins to franchise him again next year for $23,943,600 absent a long-term deal before early next March. That's especially true if Falcons offensive coordinator Kyle Shanahan -- Cousins' former play caller in Washington -- gets a head coaching job after the season and comes calling. If Cousins' uneven play continues, his realistic worst-case scenario should be getting a deal similar to Brock Osweiler's four-year, $72 million deal with the Texans, given there are more NFL teams than competent starting quarterbacks.

getting this franchise into the playoffs would be great for Cousins - 10 games to go

Scot is not letting Cousins play for another franchise, as long as he 'proves' himself ... he will pay him what the market dictates

Cousins has 10 games left to establish his market value - could be a lot of fun discussions