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

Countertrey wrote:I don't like them either... but, as long as the backloaded contract is reserved for the true exception, rather than the rule, it should not be much of a problem... Regarding Cousins wanting to test his value in the market? It's moot. He will not get the chance. He is either tagged... or he signs a contract with DC. And, the reality is, the only way the Redskins "save" any money here, is to release Cousins... Not a chance in Hades...

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

Countertrey wrote:I don't like them either... but, as long as the backloaded contract is reserved for the true exception, rather than the rule, it should not be much of a problem... Regarding Cousins wanting to test his value in the market? It's moot. He will not get the chance. He is either tagged... or he signs a contract with DC. And, the reality is, the only way the Redskins "save" any money here, is to release Cousins... Not a chance in Hades...

It may not have any teeth but at least one DC area sportswriter / radio personality has suggested the Redskins may very well not use the franchise tag and allow Cousins to test free agency. His thought was there might be a "gentleman's agreement" between McCartney and McCloughan that the Redskins would be given the opportunity to match or compete with any offer from another team. The problem there is McCloughan would have to implicitly trust McCartney to give him honest numbers instead of having the Redskins bid against themselves, not that they've ever done that before.

Report: Cousins won't protest franchise tag
"People familiar with his thinking" tell the Washington Post free agent Kirk Cousins won't protest if franchise tagged.
That's good news, as the franchise tag is an inevitability in Cousins' case. The question is whether the sides can hammer out a long-term deal before the mid-July deadline.

I’ve never liked the franchise tag for the Redskins when it comes to Cousins because of where it could lead. If Cousins plays well, then he would have made nearly $20 million and will then be in line for a deal bigger than he would have received this offseason. If not, it could lead to another franchise tag and approximately $24 million payday. That’s $44 million in two seasons -- or the amount of guaranteed money that he might receive on a long-term deal.

riggofan wrote:For those arguing in favor of the franchise tag for a year, I think this comment from John Keim is worth looking at:

I’ve never liked the franchise tag for the Redskins when it comes to Cousins because of where it could lead. If Cousins plays well, then he would have made nearly $20 million and will then be in line for a deal bigger than he would have received this offseason. If not, it could lead to another franchise tag and approximately $24 million payday. That’s $44 million in two seasons -- or the amount of guaranteed money that he might receive on a long-term deal.

Let that one sink in for a bit.

This makes me believe we're going to get a long term deal done before the season starts. I just can't see the team going the FT route for a year. Doesn't make any sense.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

riggofan wrote:For those arguing in favor of the franchise tag for a year, I think this comment from John Keim is worth looking at:

I’ve never liked the franchise tag for the Redskins when it comes to Cousins because of where it could lead. If Cousins plays well, then he would have made nearly $20 million and will then be in line for a deal bigger than he would have received this offseason. If not, it could lead to another franchise tag and approximately $24 million payday. That’s $44 million in two seasons -- or the amount of guaranteed money that he might receive on a long-term deal.

Let that one sink in for a bit.

This makes me believe we're going to get a long term deal done before the season starts. I just can't see the team going the FT route for a year. Doesn't make any sense.

That's stupid. If he plays well then he's worth the money. If he doesn't then he's not getting franchise tagged two years in a row.

riggofan wrote:Stupid? You think it would be a good idea to find yourself paying $44m for two years instead of $44m for five years? And what happens at the end of that second year? There's no three year franchise tag.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

riggofan wrote:Stupid? You think it would be a good idea to find yourself paying $44m for two years instead of $44m for five years? And what happens at the end of that second year? There's no three year franchise tag.

Again, if he's bad you aren't going to pay for the 2nd franchise tag. The first one give you the opportunity to a) lock in a QB for this season and make him prove he's worth a long-term deal, and b) address the fact that you have no other quarterbacks on the roster because a) RGIII is gone and b) Colt McCoy is a free agent and isn't a realistic option as a starter in any case.

If Cousins is the second coming of Quarterback Jesus this season then you have the option of tagging him again, receiving two 1st round picks if someone else wants to pay for him, working out a long-term deal, or letting him walk. Nothing says you have to pay for the second franchise tag. Keim is making a baseless assumption there. How many players in the history of the league have been franchise tagged in back-to-back seasons? Not many because 120% of the previous year's salary on a franchise tag is a fortune, as he pointed out. The last team to do it was Cleveland (Of Course, because they are the epitome of stupid ownership and management) and it was on kicker Phil Dawson, who makes a lot less than a starting quarterback. Before that the Ravens did it with Terrell Suggs back in 2008-2009. Those are the only two I can remember.

riggofan wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

riggofan wrote:Stupid? You think it would be a good idea to find yourself paying $44m for two years instead of $44m for five years? And what happens at the end of that second year? There's no three year franchise tag.

Again, if he's bad you aren't going to pay for the 2nd franchise tag. The first one give you the opportunity to a) lock in a QB for this season and make him prove he's worth a long-term deal, and b) address the fact that you have no other quarterbacks on the roster because a) RGIII is gone and b) Colt McCoy is a free agent and isn't a realistic option as a starter in any case.

If Cousins is the second coming of Quarterback Jesus this season then you have the option of tagging him again, receiving two 1st round picks if someone else wants to pay for him, working out a long-term deal, or letting him walk. Nothing says you have to pay for the second franchise tag. Keim is making a baseless assumption there. How many players in the history of the league have been franchise tagged in back-to-back seasons? Not many because 120% of the previous year's salary on a franchise tag is a fortune, as he pointed out. The last team to do it was Cleveland (Of Course, because they are the epitome of stupid ownership and management) and it was on kicker Phil Dawson, who makes a lot less than a starting quarterback. Before that the Ravens did it with Terrell Suggs back in 2008-2009. Those are the only two I can remember.

You did a lot of typing there but what you basically said is that yes, you would be cool paying $44m for two years. ok!

riggofan wrote:You did a lot of typing there but what you basically said is that yes, you would be cool paying $44m for two years. ok!

Countertrey wrote:That's a bit of an oversimplification of what he said... which was not fair... He simply pointed out that there is a point at which it would be hypothetically worth it... a point most of us could conceive.

otoh... it was rather long...

hitmandm wrote:KC is a slightly better Nick Foles. He will never take us anywhere. Its good to see the Skins Brass not overpaying for Kirk "I cant throw 10 yards" Cousins.

hitmandm wrote:Tom Brady had a 15Mil cap hit with a base of 9 Mil in 2015. Based on that, KC should make like 900K-1.5M. To say he is 1/10th Tom Brady is still overpaying Cousins.

hitmandm wrote:Tom Brady had a 15Mil cap hit with a base of 9 Mil in 2015. Based on that, KC should make like 900K-1.5M. To say he is 1/10th Tom Brady is still overpaying Cousins.

riggofan wrote:

Countertrey wrote:That's a bit of an oversimplification of what he said... which was not fair... He simply pointed out that there is a point at which it would be hypothetically worth it... a point most of us could conceive.

otoh... it was rather long...

Well to be fair, I asked a yes or no question. Even with all of the lengthy hypothetical explanation his answer boiled down to a yes.

Anyway, we'll see what happens. My main point was that I think its OK to use the tag now, but it would be a demonstrably dumb move not to work out a contract before the season starts.

I'm actually a little baffled about the reluctance around Cousins. There's always some risk involved with any player. Signing him to a starting QB level contract doesn't seem like nearly as much of a gamble as say, trading away multiple first round picks on a completely untested rookie QB, you know what I mean? The absolute worst case is that he doesn't live up to the contract in which case we're turning to a Colt McCoy or a draft pick. Its not like there is some other amazing option out there that we're passing over for Cousins.

I would think after two years with Cousins that Gruden should have enough information to make a call on whether or not he can roll with Cousins. Just make a decision and live with it.

Countertrey wrote:I can see most of your points... with the exception of the "dumb move" comment... it is what it is... if Cousins team is being excessively demanding, then you can't just roll over for the sake of getting a contract, and the season will dictate the following year. Frankly, I thing the FO will work it's butt off to come to reasonable terms with the Cousins team... BEFORE the start of the season.