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

riggofan wrote:

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.

hah. Yeah I think we're in agreement. If "demonstrably dumb" is too strong, I would just say there's a very strong case why a year on the FT would not be the wisest move. Which is why I agree with you that the team will get something done before the season starts.

While I agree with you, I also see it from the team’s prospective as well. The FT is the only leverage the team has, KC would be taking a risk to play under the FT for 17-19 mil…injury, bad play could cost him double that amount …that I think the Skins are willing to pay for a 4-5 year deal. It would be really interesting if the team uses the transition tag…we would find out his market price pretty quick if that happens.

DEHog wrote:While I agree with you, I also see it from the team’s prospective as well. The FT is the only leverage the team has, KC would be taking a risk to play under the FT for 17-19 mil…injury, bad play could cost him double that amount …that I think the Skins are willing to pay for a 4-5 year deal. It would be really interesting if the team uses the transition tag…we would find out his market price pretty quick if that happens.

Yeah hope I'm not confusing the issue. I'm sure the team will use the tag today. I just think it would be a huge mistake not to get a deal done before the season starts.

They'll get it done, I suspect.

It would be a bit of a gamble for Kirk to turn down something like 5 years, 100 million w 40 million guaranteed.

What if gets hurt next year. He'd have the FT money but not the next 20 million.

Meanwhile, the 'Skins would be committing less than the equivalent of 2 FTs on him. Seems like such an offer should do the trick.

DarthMonk wrote:It would be a bit of a gamble for Kirk to turn down something like 5 years, 100 million w 40 million guaranteed.

What if gets hurt next year. He'd have the FT money but not the next 20 million.

Meanwhile, the 'Skins would be committing less than the equivalent of 2 FTs on him. Seems like such an offer should do the trick.

If Scot McCloughan offers Kirk Cousins that contract, I want him fired. Matt Ryan and Drew Brees got contracts with those numbers. Andy Dalton got 6 years, $96 million with $17MM guaranteed. I don't want Kirk Cousins under contract for the next six years either. He's done exactly nothing to warrant that length of contract. If he's god's gift this season then pay him. If he's average or worse then you haven't locked your team into a long-term deal with another garbage pile quarterback.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:It would be a bit of a gamble for Kirk to turn down something like 5 years, 100 million w 40 million guaranteed.

What if gets hurt next year. He'd have the FT money but not the next 20 million.

Meanwhile, the 'Skins would be committing less than the equivalent of 2 FTs on him. Seems like such an offer should do the trick.

If Scot McCloughan offers Kirk Cousins that contract, I want him fired. Matt Ryan and Drew Brees got contracts with those numbers. Andy Dalton got 6 years, $96 million with $17MM guaranteed. I don't want Kirk Cousins under contract for the next six years either. He's done exactly nothing to warrant that length of contract. If he's god's gift this season then pay him. If he's average or worse then you haven't locked your team into a long-term deal with another garbage pile quarterback.

I could see the contract being in that neighborhood...it's all about timing and supply and demand..add to that the cap going up. I see it more like 4 years with a option (Kirk is 27) for a fifth for 50-60 mil with 25-30 mil guaranteed

riggofan wrote:

DEHog wrote:While I agree with you, I also see it from the team’s prospective as well. The FT is the only leverage the team has, KC would be taking a risk to play under the FT for 17-19 mil…injury, bad play could cost him double that amount …that I think the Skins are willing to pay for a 4-5 year deal. It would be really interesting if the team uses the transition tag…we would find out his market price pretty quick if that happens.

Yeah hope I'm not confusing the issue. I'm sure the team will use the tag today. I just think it would be a huge mistake not to get a deal done before the season starts.

They'll get it done, I suspect.

No I get what you're saying...I agree and hope that's the case! My point was/is if KC camp wants a deal that SM and company feel is not right for the franchise they could make him play under the FT tag. This would give them another year to evaluate him.... a year where he goes into the off-season as the starter.

Breaking news, Captain Kirk:Tagged

Kirk Cousins , QB: Cousins will be franchise-tagged by Washington, according to a report by FOX5DC. This time last year, it was not even a sure thing that he would be their starter, so he’s come quite a long way in the last 366 days. Cousins is coming off by far the best season of his career (his first as the full-time starter), but he has no track record of good play at the NFL level other than what he did in 2015. He previously was one of the most turnover-prone quarterbacks in the NFL, but he cut down on them big time as he led Washington to the NFC East crown. The tag can essentially work as a one-year, "prove it" type deal for Cousins, allowing Washington a bit more time to see if it wants to commit to him as the quarterback of the future. Washington used the non-exclusive tag on Cousins, which means he can negotiate with other teams this offseason as well. The tag value for quarterbacks this year is $19,953,000.

I still think a deal gets done - nobody is giving up 2 first round picks

Looking like non-exclusive FT, worth about 19.953 M... per Ian Rapoport and Albert Breer of NFLN...

Both sides say the plan is to continue working on a contract...

DEHog wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:It would be a bit of a gamble for Kirk to turn down something like 5 years, 100 million w 40 million guaranteed.

What if gets hurt next year. He'd have the FT money but not the next 20 million.

Meanwhile, the 'Skins would be committing less than the equivalent of 2 FTs on him. Seems like such an offer should do the trick.

If Scot McCloughan offers Kirk Cousins that contract, I want him fired. Matt Ryan and Drew Brees got contracts with those numbers. Andy Dalton got 6 years, $96 million with $17MM guaranteed. I don't want Kirk Cousins under contract for the next six years either. He's done exactly nothing to warrant that length of contract. If he's god's gift this season then pay him. If he's average or worse then you haven't locked your team into a long-term deal with another garbage pile quarterback.

I could see the contract being in that neighborhood...it's all about timing and supply and demand..add to that the cap going up. I see it more like 4 years with a option (Kirk is 27) for a fifth for 50-60 mil with 25-30 mil guaranteed

A while back, I had considered "market value" for Cousins to be somewhere between Ryan, Stafford, Smith, and Dalton. I thought it would be in the 17-19M range with about 35M guaranteed. Based on what is happening, I suspect -- in agreement with your numbers --- that Scot is interested in signing him in the 12-15M range, which is somewhat understandable, but Cousins and his shark-type agent know that while that may be a fair contract amount based on his history/performance, his market value is MUCH higher.

If I were Cousins' agent, I too, wouldn't be happy with anything under 17M per year with about 35-40M guaranteed. And considering the fact he'll be either franchised and get $20M OR he will be sent to the open market, and get his "market value", they can hold out for what they want. And if Cousins is franchised (although I am VERY confident they'll use the non-exclusive) and plays similarly next season as he did last season, he'll then get a $80-100M contract with potentially $40M+ guaranteed --- which, in effect, turns into nearly $60M in his pocket (YR 1: 20M, YR2: 20M signing, 20M contract) for 2 seasons of work. Not too bad for him and something I would be willing to take a risk in doing --- vs. signing a 4/5 year, 60M contract. No question at all. I'd hold out, just like Cousins is doing.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:It would be a bit of a gamble for Kirk to turn down something like 5 years, 100 million w 40 million guaranteed.

What if gets hurt next year. He'd have the FT money but not the next 20 million.

Meanwhile, the 'Skins would be committing less than the equivalent of 2 FTs on him. Seems like such an offer should do the trick.

If Scot McCloughan offers Kirk Cousins that contract, I want him fired. Matt Ryan and Drew Brees got contracts with those numbers. Andy Dalton got 6 years, $96 million with $17MM guaranteed. I don't want Kirk Cousins under contract for the next six years either. He's done exactly nothing to warrant that length of contract. If he's god's gift this season then pay him. If he's average or worse then you haven't locked your team into a long-term deal with another garbage pile quarterback.

On the other hand, since we just tagged him we are on the hook for 20 million. If we can't sign him by mid July, what kind of year from him will have us parting ways and how likely is such a year? Meanwhile, what kind of year keeps him here, how likely is such a year, and how much will he cost then?

I don't think 5 years, 100 million w 40 million guaranteed looks so bad. If we aren't happy after 2 years he's gone and if we are happy we're thrilled.

There is also inflation and a rising cap. You really gotta add a nice percentage to every comparable contract for every year that has transpired since any comp was signed.

Cousins had a great season .... but ... I'm really glad this FO wants to see if he's worth what he and his guys think he's worth - we cannot lose




actually - I LOVE IT

DarthMonk wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:It would be a bit of a gamble for Kirk to turn down something like 5 years, 100 million w 40 million guaranteed.

What if gets hurt next year. He'd have the FT money but not the next 20 million.

Meanwhile, the 'Skins would be committing less than the equivalent of 2 FTs on him. Seems like such an offer should do the trick.

If Scot McCloughan offers Kirk Cousins that contract, I want him fired. Matt Ryan and Drew Brees got contracts with those numbers. Andy Dalton got 6 years, $96 million with $17MM guaranteed. I don't want Kirk Cousins under contract for the next six years either. He's done exactly nothing to warrant that length of contract. If he's god's gift this season then pay him. If he's average or worse then you haven't locked your team into a long-term deal with another garbage pile quarterback.

On the other hand, since we just tagged him we are on the hook for 20 million. If we can't sign him by mid July, what kind of year from him will have us parting ways and how likely is such a year? Meanwhile, what kind of year keeps him here, how likely is such a year, and how much will he cost then?

I don't think 5 years, 100 million w 40 million guaranteed looks so bad. If we aren't happy after 2 years he's gone and if we are happy we're thrilled.

There is also inflation and a rising cap. You really gotta add a nice percentage to every comparable contract for every year that has transpired since any comp was signed.

I think he'd have to have a worse season than 9-7 and regress in completion percentage or interception percentage or both, and I think the likelihood of all three is high. In two years we're not talking about Kirk Cousins leading us to the promised land. We're talking about the quarterback we drafted. Cousins has a limited ceiling but, because he's the best we can do, and because the market will bear it due to the law of supply and demand we're paying him the $19.953MM. That's if Scot McCloughan is smart. One "prove it" year at that cost doesn't kill the long-term growth of the franchise. A long-term contract for Kirk Cousins does. He's not a top tier quarterback and he's never going to be one.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:I think he'd have to have a worse season than 9-7 and regress in completion percentage or interception percentage or both, and I think the likelihood of all three is high. In two years we're not talking about Kirk Cousins leading us to the promised land. We're talking about the quarterback we drafted. Cousins has a limited ceiling but, because he's the best we can do, and because the market will bear it due to the law of supply and demand we're paying him the $19.953MM. That's if Scot McCloughan is smart. One "prove it" year at that cost doesn't kill the long-term growth of the franchise. A long-term contract for Kirk Cousins does. He's not a top tier quarterback and he's never going to be one.

You might be right about your likelihood claim but how does a contract we can get out of in 2 years if we are not pleased kill the long-term growth of the franchise?

Also, suppose he does what he's always done - work hard and improve. What does the deal we try to sign him to next year look like?

I'm still liking my original 5 - 6 years, $90 M - $110 M, $30 M - $40 M guaranteed.

DarthMonk wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:I think he'd have to have a worse season than 9-7 and regress in completion percentage or interception percentage or both, and I think the likelihood of all three is high. In two years we're not talking about Kirk Cousins leading us to the promised land. We're talking about the quarterback we drafted. Cousins has a limited ceiling but, because he's the best we can do, and because the market will bear it due to the law of supply and demand we're paying him the $19.953MM. That's if Scot McCloughan is smart. One "prove it" year at that cost doesn't kill the long-term growth of the franchise. A long-term contract for Kirk Cousins does. He's not a top tier quarterback and he's never going to be one.

You might be right about your likelihood claim but how does a contract we can get out of in 2 years if we are not pleased kill the long-term growth of the franchise?

Also, suppose he does what he's always done - work hard and improve. What does the deal we try to sign him to next year look like?

I'm still liking my original 5 - 6 years, $90 M - $110 M, $30 M - $40 M guaranteed.

Unless I see 10-6 or better, wins against teams with winning records, another division championship, and a first round playoff win ... I don't like that. The one thing the franchise tag does for the team is If Cousins is anything less than stellar next season he becomes a $5 MM a year backup. It only costs the team if he's actually a franchise quarterback, in which case they should pay him.

I know you and a lot of other people are thinking in terms of the salary cap but it hurts the team more to carry Cousins long-term if he's just another in a long line of also ran quarterbacks in D.C.

DarthMonk wrote:I'm still liking my original 5 - 6 years, $90 M - $110 M, $30 M - $40 M guaranteed.

Fans are going to balk because the numbers look ridiculous, but I think you're in the right neighborhood. And I'm pretty sure that deal could be structured so that its a better option than two consecutive years of the franchise tag.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:I know you and a lot of other people are thinking in terms of the salary cap but it hurts the team more to carry Cousins long-term if he's just another in a long line of also ran quarterbacks in D.C.

This is where I disagree with you, man. 1) If Cousins completely fails, the long term pain is probably three years. and 2) If he completely fails, the salary cap hit from his contract is the least of our problems.

I'll just end here by saying that ultimately I'm going to trust GMSM and Gruden on this one. But this pussy-footing around on the QB is just allowing his contract value to go up and up. Wonder what we could have signed him for if they'd talked new contract back in October.

riggofan wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:I know you and a lot of other people are thinking in terms of the salary cap but it hurts the team more to carry Cousins long-term if he's just another in a long line of also ran quarterbacks in D.C.

This is where I disagree with you, man. 1) If Cousins completely fails, the long term pain is probably three years. and 2) If he completely fails, the salary cap hit from his contract is the least of our problems.

I'll just end here by saying that ultimately I'm going to trust GMSM and Gruden on this one. But this pussy-footing around on the QB is just allowing his contract value to go up and up. Wonder what we could have signed him for if they'd talked new contract back in October.

I don't want to give another stiff three years. In three years two-thirds or more of the current roster will be gone.

But, if they had gone to Cousins immediately after they decided RGIII wasn't the guy they could have had him for peanuts. He made $660k last season. If the Skins had offered him a three year, $30MM contract with $15MM guaranteed he'd have jumped on it. But that was before he started performing like he was deserving of a chance at keeping the starting job.

Well the price for KC just went up…nobody happier about this contract than KC’s agent!!

The Philadelphia Eagles agreed to a two-year contract with quarterback Sam Bradford, keeping Bradford off the free-agent market without using the franchise tag.
The deal is worth $36 million, with $26 million of that guaranteed, according to ESPN's Adam Schefter.

Cousins has earned a good deal - IF this FO felt there was a good chance that Cousins was going to continue to improve and become a really good NFL QB, he would be getting a really good deal

Cousins will be playing QB for the Redskins for as long as this FO wants him to - I LIKE THAT

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:I don't want to give another stiff three years.

I don't either. That's why I'm going to trust GMSM and Gruden.

Worrying overpaying Cousins by 20 to 30 percent seems silly to me. One of the really great thing about this season was the lack of drama. Now we got months of this crap ahead of us unless another team does the Skins a favor by putting a big long term offer in front of Kirk and forces the Skins to do the smart thing and match it.

This FO will certainly match any reasonable offer and they will not (& should not) sign a player to a contract that does not protect the franchise

Cousins wants as much money as he can get but both Cousins & the FO know he's not getting a huge deal - he's not that good

Cousins is possibly the best QB available right now but his highest value and best fit is with the Redskins

SkinsJock wrote:This FO will certainly match any reasonable offer and they will not (& should not) sign a player to a contract that does not protect the franchise

Cousins wants as much money as he can get but both Cousins & the FO know he's not getting a huge deal - he's not that good

Cousins is possibly the best QB available right now but his highest value and best fit is with the Redskins

There you go again.......

riggofan wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:I don't want to give another stiff three years.

I don't either. That's why I'm going to trust GMSM and Gruden.

It's being reported he will sign the franchise tender tomorrow, so he'll be in OTA's and training camp. Now it's all on Scot McGloughan to come up with a deal he can stomach and Bruce Allen to come up with one we can stomach.

Not that Cousins has to take one. He could have enough confidence in his game to negotiate at the end of the season if he thinks he will be worth even more next year.