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

A move we all saw coming. I guess now the "real" negotiations can begin?

Popular speculation is that this is the preamble to the Skins working out a deal with the 49ers.

http://www.redskins.com/news/article-1/ ... 98b7239343

Irn-Bru wrote:A move we all saw coming. I guess now the "real" negotiations can begin?

Popular speculation is that this is the preamble to the Skins working out a deal with the 49ers.

http://www.redskins.com/news/article-1/ ... 98b7239343

Yes but with the exclusive tag the player cannot talk with other teams…I know you can rescind a FT can you change the type of tag before a player signs it? Not sure why the Skins just didn’t do a non-exclusive and let him seek a deal?? Guessing the Skins are trying to present a “we want you” front.

This don't sound like a nice warm & fuzzy deal at all. This will be Cousins' last season, the FO screwed the pooch this time, again.

oj wrote:This don't sound like a nice warm & fuzzy deal at all.

I've never gotten the sense from Cousins that he resents being paid top dollar for his services. All indications are that he doesn't mind playing on FTs. I know I wouldn't.

Irn-Bru wrote:Popular speculation is that this is the preamble to the Skins working out a deal with the 49ers.

I have trouble following how anyone is reading into what the tag means. I swear I saw one of the ESPN guys write something like, "This shows Bruce Allen was serious about working out a LTD." Guess we'll see.

riggofan wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:Popular speculation is that this is the preamble to the Skins working out a deal with the 49ers.

I have trouble following how anyone is reading into what the tag means. I swear I saw one of the ESPN guys write something like, "This shows Bruce Allen was serious about working out a LTD." Guess we'll see.

If they weren't wouldn't they have used the non-exclusive tag??

Irn-Bru wrote:Popular speculation is that this is the preamble to the Skins working out a deal with the 49ers.

Why would the 49ers agree to such a deal? It's still a one year rental, and they would potentially risk Kirk leaving after this year.

StorminMormon86 wrote:Why would the 49ers agree to such a deal? It's still a one year rental, and they would potentially risk Kirk leaving after this year.

It would be a sign and trade. The skins would agree to trade terms with SF, then SF would negotiate a LTD with Cousins, and once SF and Cousins had come to terms, they'd trade him. If SF and Cousins didn't (highly unlikely), then the deal would be off.

This could be seen either way: the skins want to negotiate a LTD or they want the ability to trade him without the restrictions of a non-exclusive clause. Based on the apparent disfunction and idioticy of Snyder and Allen, I'd say the latter, but who knows at this point. Snyder & Co. are so stupid you have no idea what goes thru their minds at any give point.

There was this though:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-t ... d-to-49ers

DEHog wrote:

riggofan wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:Popular speculation is that this is the preamble to the Skins working out a deal with the 49ers.

I have trouble following how anyone is reading into what the tag means. I swear I saw one of the ESPN guys write something like, "This shows Bruce Allen was serious about working out a LTD." Guess we'll see.

If they weren't wouldn't they have used the non-exclusive tag??

Yeah I guess that's the logic.

Ian Rappoport says Kirk Cousins isn't going anywhere.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-t ... d-to-49ers

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Ian Rappoport says Kirk Cousins isn't going anywhere.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-t ... d-to-49ers

I still don't understand from his reporting why the exclusive tag says "we're not going trade him to the 49ers". Not saying he's wrong, but I just don't understand why he or anybody else is drawing that conclusion.

Irn-Bru wrote:

oj wrote:This don't sound like a nice warm & fuzzy deal at all.

I've never gotten the sense from Cousins that he resents being paid top dollar for his services. All indications are that he doesn't mind playing on FTs. I know I wouldn't.

What else would you expect him to say?

riggofan wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Ian Rappoport says Kirk Cousins isn't going anywhere.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-t ... d-to-49ers

I still don't understand from his reporting why the exclusive tag says "we're not going trade him to the 49ers". Not saying he's wrong, but I just don't understand why he or anybody else is drawing that conclusion.

Because if they were going to trade him they would use the non-exclusive tag. That way another team could come in with a better long-term contract offer if they wanted to.

That's the logic behind it, as far as I can tell.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

riggofan wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Ian Rappoport says Kirk Cousins isn't going anywhere.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-t ... d-to-49ers

I still don't understand from his reporting why the exclusive tag says "we're not going trade him to the 49ers". Not saying he's wrong, but I just don't understand why he or anybody else is drawing that conclusion.

Because if they were going to trade him they would use the non-exclusive tag. That way another team could come in with a better long-term contract offer if they wanted to.

That's the logic behind it, as far as I can tell.

The non-exclusive tag limits Captain Pick's leverage. If SF wants him, they'll have to come to the Redskins first as opposed to the perennial choke QB. This gives the Redskins more leverage and theoretically more compensation. Plus you want to avoid a poison pill.

As I proposed months ago, we will draft a QB high and if the 49ers don't trade, we will develop a new young QB who isn't a choking hot mess in meaningful games. We can trade the Pickster throughout the year to a team who has playoff hopes but lost their QB.

But the 49ers new coach with a front office who wants stability and a new leaf to turn is desperate to get the past behind them. It is our best hope to turn a 4th round QB who clearly is not a championship caliber QB into a bevy of draft picks to a sucker franchise that is still reeling from the Harbaugh years.

The Redskins are most likely not going to be able to sign Cousins to a long term deal and once again be the laughing stock of the NFL. I hate you Daniel Snyder

hitmandm wrote:The non-exclusive tag limits Captain Pick's leverage. If SF wants him, they'll have to come to the Redskins first as opposed to the perennial choke QB. This gives the Redskins more leverage and theoretically more compensation. Plus you want to avoid a poison pill.

As I proposed months ago, we will draft a QB high and if the 49ers don't trade, we will develop a new young QB who isn't a choking hot mess in meaningful games. We can trade the Pickster throughout the year to a team who has playoff hopes but lost their QB.

But the 49ers new coach with a front office who wants stability and a new leaf to turn is desperate to get the past behind them. It is our best hope to turn a 4th round QB who clearly is not a championship caliber QB into a bevy of draft picks to a sucker franchise that is still reeling from the Harbaugh years.

How does this give the Redskins more leverage? To me it's like selling a house you're going to get what a buyer is willing to offer? I just saw the exclusive tag as the Redskins saying to Cousins, we want you here, remember Cousins has said on serveral occasions he wants to be were he is wanted. Honestly the Skins are between a rock and a hard place, teams understand that this will be Cousins second year under the tag and the Skins would never tag him a third year. If I'm the 9ers knowing Cousins wants to be here... I sit tight and wait...heck they might get Cousins without giviing up any picks??

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Because if they were going to trade him they would use the non-exclusive tag.

They can trade him under the exclusive tag too. I understand what you're saying but its not a clear indication of anything.

It was funny listening to a couple different radio stations this morning where the "expert" opinions were completely at odds. I literally heard four different opinions. Which kind of confirms that nobody really knows what is going to happen and the type of tag - exclusive or non - doesn't really reveal anything at all.

I'm okay with that actually. Cousins has been really shrewd in his negotiation. I think the team has to be as well, and its better if they keep things close to the vest.

Btw whoever was posting about the Redskins' "leverage" is completely deluded. The team has ZERO leverage and everyone in the world knows it. The only thing they have is that Cousins will have to play in Washington this year which he seems content to do. The team can make whatever demands they want. Anybody they're negotiating with just has to say, "No thanks. We will wait one year."

riggofan wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:Because if they were going to trade him they would use the non-exclusive tag.

They can trade him under the exclusive tag too. I understand what you're saying but its not a clear indication of anything.

It was funny listening to a couple different radio stations this morning where the "expert" opinions were completely at odds. I literally heard four different opinions. Which kind of confirms that nobody really knows what is going to happen and the type of tag - exclusive or non - doesn't really reveal anything at all.

I'm okay with that actually. Cousins has been really shrewd in his negotiation. I think the team has to be as well, and its better if they keep things close to the vest.

Btw whoever was posting about the Redskins' "leverage" is completely deluded. The team has ZERO leverage and everyone in the world knows it. The only thing they have is that Cousins will have to play in Washington this year which he seems content to do. The team can make whatever demands they want. Anybody they're negotiating with just has to say, "No thanks. We will wait one year."

Well said and totally agree...Shefty just said Cousins may have the greatest leverage in the history of the NFL

I think you guys are looking at it like a bunch of CPA's haggling over the price of a commodity. Listen to Cousins, he says he wants to play where he is wanted. Whatever money he wants is guaranteed, how much this guy gets paid is not the issue - he needs to feel he is wanted. Like Brady. He just got a clear message, they want to rent his arm for another year. That is not the message he wanted to hear, that is not the message you deliver to a guy you want to build the team around. He's gone next year unless there is a serious change in the FA attitude and I don't see that happening.

DEHog wrote:

hitmandm wrote:The non-exclusive tag limits Captain Pick's leverage. If SF wants him, they'll have to come to the Redskins first as opposed to the perennial choke QB. This gives the Redskins more leverage and theoretically more compensation. Plus you want to avoid a poison pill.

As I proposed months ago, we will draft a QB high and if the 49ers don't trade, we will develop a new young QB who isn't a choking hot mess in meaningful games. We can trade the Pickster throughout the year to a team who has playoff hopes but lost their QB.

But the 49ers new coach with a front office who wants stability and a new leaf to turn is desperate to get the past behind them. It is our best hope to turn a 4th round QB who clearly is not a championship caliber QB into a bevy of draft picks to a sucker franchise that is still reeling from the Harbaugh years.

How does this give the Redskins more leverage? To me it's like selling a house you're going to get what a buyer is willing to offer? I just saw the exclusive tag as the Redskins saying to Cousins, we want you here, remember Cousins has said on serveral occasions he wants to be were he is wanted. Honestly the Skins are between a rock and a hard place, teams understand that this will be Cousins second year under the tag and the Skins would never tag him a third year. If I'm the 9ers knowing Cousins wants to be here... I sit tight and wait...heck they might get Cousins without giviing up any picks??

Just trying to make sure people are taslking about the same thing.

What kind of message would the transition tag have sent?

DarthMonk wrote:What kind of message would the transition tag have sent?

I was just making the point that the Tag the Skins chose was the one where Cousin couldn't seek another deal...I think if they had chosen the Non-Exclusive Tag it would have sent a clear message to Cousins that the Skins weren’t interested in signing him to a LTD??

I also heard on NFL network that NO TEAM will franchise tag him ever, ever again as this would cost the team (any team) outrageous money.

I do home we sign him to a LTD............ HTTR

tribeofjudah wrote:I also heard on NFL network that NO TEAM will franchise tag him ever, ever again as this would cost the team (any team) outrageous money.

I do home we sign him to a LTD............ HTTR

Correct, he has Drew Brees to thank for that. Brees sued and won his case that the FT was number of times tagged total, not number of times a specific team tagged you.