Kirk Cousins - Page 2 - NFL UK Forums
NFL UK Mobile Logo
Go Back   NFL UK Forums > National Football League > NFL season

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 14.07.2017, 02:28 PM
boknows34's Avatar
boknows34 boknows34 is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 03.03.2006
Posts: 15,471
Default

Actually I think it's Cousins who is stalling on signing a long term contract and not the Redskins. He knows he's guaranteed to earn another $24m in addition to the $20m from last season, and he also knows the Redskins can't afford to franchise tag him again in 2018 as it would cost them $34.5m, virtually guaranteeing he becomes a free agent next season. In fact I think he's very happy to walk away with $44m over two years and then hit the open market next year when teams could bid against one another for his services.

That would allow a team with tons of cap space, a dire need at QB and a coach that knows him well (and we all know who that team is) to perhaps make a long term offer to Cousins that he simply can't refuse.

The Redskins could use to protect themselves by using the non exclusive franchise tag or the rarely used transition tag. This would allow Cousins to negotiate with other teams and sign an offer sheet that would at least give the Redskins a few days to consider matching or declining it.

If they decide to decline, and I think deep down the Redskins know already they wouldn't be able to match any offer sheets in 2018 if the contract is front loaded, they can collect draft compensation instead.

Cousins holds all the cards here and both sides know it. Le'veon Bell is in no rush either apparently to sign before Monday's deadline. Bell knows he's guaranteed to be the highest paid RB in the NFL with the franchise tag and could then hit the open market next March if the Steelers don't tag him for another $16m.

Last edited by boknows34; 14.07.2017 at 02:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 14.07.2017, 02:34 PM
RockyBalboa's Avatar
RockyBalboa RockyBalboa is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 15.11.2015
Posts: 1,522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by olig23 View Post
The answer is you meander along forever with average QB play, until you get a chance to draft a guy you like more. The Eagles got that, and made their move. The Chiefs have this year too. But some teams are solid enough that they never are forced to move on. Like Baltimore, Chicago up until last year, etc.

Regardless, Cousins has been anything but mediocre.

There is a line, of course. Bradford is around that line. As is Alex Smith.

Smith works because as Jim Harbaugh realised, you build a great D, strong O-line and rushing offence. But he can't take the lid of the opposition D - that's a limiting factor. So they took a flyer on Kaep, because he could hit the down field ball. He's proven to be worse than Smith. But I get why they tried it out.
I think my line of thinking is how you would play Madden, not in the real world.

QB's have so much leverage. More than any other position in sports possibly.

He is probably asking for a humongous, long term deal. Their hope will be he doesn't regress....Then you've got a cap sapping contract to deal with.

He was third in passing yards during regular season last year. 3 in completions as well.

So yes I am being harsh I think. And he may not be the Redskins problem.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 14.07.2017, 02:48 PM
boknows34's Avatar
boknows34 boknows34 is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 03.03.2006
Posts: 15,471
Default

These massive $125m contracts look great on paper and make headlines but the only thing that really matters is the guaranteed money.

The Redskins could've signed Cousins last year to a long term 5 year contract with a guaranteed $44m, money which they'll end up paying him anyway in 2016 and 17. They could've structured it with a relatively small signing bonus (like the Raiders did with Carr) but then guaranteed his basic salary for the first two years of his contract.

If they'd done that the Redskins would've given themselves much more flexibility. By front loading most of the guaranteed money, you give yourself a get-out clause with minimal damage to any future dead money if Cousins turned out to be a dud. And if Cousins is the real deal then you still have a franchise QB under contract for another 3-4 years.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 14.07.2017, 03:02 PM
LesterHayes's Avatar
LesterHayes LesterHayes is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 21.08.2012
Posts: 3,179
Default

The only thing that makes sense to me is that Cousins doesn't want to sign.

As Bo said, $44m over 2 years is pretty appealing. Personally, were I in the Redskins front office, I'd have paid him what he wanted when he asked for it last year. By Franchising him instead he still gets paid rather well and, on the premise he has even a half decent year, he signs a contract with someone else for this season. What's the going rate for even a half decent starting QB?

As it was, he played better than that last season and so can afford to play on the tag again, it being a nice big number anyway and his value to the market next year, even if this year is crap, is still high. Whats the going rate for a QB who played pretty well the year before last and had a crap year on a poor team this season?

Cousins wins every which way and there's some respect to the man for having the stones to bet on himself. Personally I put this down to Front Office incompetence, plain and simple.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 14.07.2017, 03:03 PM
olig23's Avatar
olig23 olig23 is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 16.07.2005
Posts: 4,893
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockyBalboa View Post
I think my line of thinking is how you would play Madden, not in the real world.

QB's have so much leverage. More than any other position in sports possibly.

He is probably asking for a humongous, long term deal. Their hope will be he doesn't regress....Then you've got a cap sapping contract to deal with.

He was third in passing yards during regular season last year. 3 in completions as well.

So yes I am being harsh I think. And he may not be the Redskins problem.
Yeah, I think there are two beliefs - broadly speaking, that are at the heart of this question.

1. Is a generalised misunderstanding of the market in terms of QB contracts.

I recall how long fans got on the Cutler deal. That's because our tendency is to look at the QBs 1-32 and say Rodgers/Brady should be top and then Cutler should be like 16th. But it's really a matter of when you sign and if the team considers you a QB they can't easily replace.

You basically get to take the top dollar once you are a commodity of any sort. It's more driven by what other QB needy teams would pay.

2. How rare Cousins' level of lay is.

This stems, in my opinion, from a faulty perception of how easy it is to find a top 16 QB. If you take the Bears as an example, Cutler holds practically every team record. The fact that he was never a top 10 QB is largely irrelevant. It's very hard to find a QB. Look at other teams.

Seattle - Wilson is probably already their best QB ever.
Atlanta - Matt Ryan is the best they've ever had.
Pittsburgh - Big Ben is #1 for me, but at worst he's #2.
Carolina - Newton is easily their best QB of all-time.
New Orleans - No debate. Brees.
San Diego - Rivers is #2 for me.
Arizona - Palmer is #3?
New England - Lol

The list is pretty crazy when you look at it. Obviously, there are exceptions like the Colts, and Packers. But they have been amazingly lucky.

There are the flip-side to that too. I mean the Browns is Easily Otto Graham and then Kosar. They've had no luck since. The Bears have had nobody forever (McMahon was never anything special) - Luckman! The Lions had Bobby Layne and I suppose Stafford is next, and he's only been good the past couple of years.

Anyway, I'm labouring the point. Finding good QB play is really hard. The skins have to consider Cousins the best they've had in 30 years. Pay the man!!!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 14.07.2017, 03:09 PM
FallenFlyer's Avatar
FallenFlyer FallenFlyer is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 06.09.2013
Posts: 4,844
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by olig23 View Post

He's massively outperformed Jamies Winston and Marcus Mariota
As an interesting observation, had Mariota not been forced out of week 17 in 2016, he would have had almost identical numbers to Cousins 2015 season in every category. (The exception being accuracy vs. yards per attempt but the difference between the two rather equalises itself).

What both were gifted in those years was a very solid line in front of them. However there is a significant difference between Jackson, Garcon (both gone) and Reed to (the admittedly breaking out) Mathews, Sharpe and Delanie Walker.

(Rightly or wrongly) it may well be these types of comparisons that have kept Washington from pulling the trigger.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 14.07.2017, 03:10 PM
olig23's Avatar
olig23 olig23 is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 16.07.2005
Posts: 4,893
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boknows34 View Post
These massive $125m contracts look great on paper and make headlines but the only thing that really matters is the guaranteed money.

The Redskins could've signed Cousins last year to a long term 5 year contract with a guaranteed $44m, money which they'll end up paying him anyway in 2016 and 17. They could've structured it with a relatively small signing bonus (like the Raiders did with Carr) but then guaranteed his basic salary for the first two years of his contract.

If they'd done that the Redskins would've given themselves much more flexibility. By front loading most of the guaranteed money, you give yourself a get-out clause with minimal damage to any future dead money if Cousins turned out to be a dud. And if Cousins is the real deal then you still have a franchise QB under contract for another 3-4 years.
True.

It's worth noting that the Raiders are possibly the Gold Standard for intelligent use of bonus money. How things have changed.

We debate contracts all the time. But if you're one of those teams who have gutted their roster (Jags, Browns, 49ers in recent years) you can overpay everyone, front load the deal, the player gets paid, you pay now and can cut later. It's smart.

The issue is with teams who are already carrying lot of back-loaded, and re-structured deals.

Also, I think it won't be long until we see some fully guaranteed deals that are lower overall value.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 14.07.2017, 03:17 PM
olig23's Avatar
olig23 olig23 is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 16.07.2005
Posts: 4,893
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FallenFlyer View Post
As an interesting observation, had Mariota not been forced out of week 17 in 2016, he would have had almost identical numbers to Cousins 2015 season in every category. (The exception being accuracy vs. yards per attempt but the difference between the two rather equalises itself).

What both were gifted in those years was a very solid line in front of them. However there is a significant difference between Jackson, Garcon (both gone) and Reed to (the admittedly breaking out) Mathews, Sharpe and Delanie Walker.

(Rightly or wrongly) it may well be these types of comparisons that have kept Washington from pulling the trigger.
It terms of the "traditional stats" I agree.

However, if you have Gamepass, go watch the first four games of this season with the Titans. He's poor. doesn't really show up on the stat line, but he's poor. He was great at times too. But it's that inconsistency he needs to iron out. And not all players improve as we are often led to think they do. So he's got thing to prove.

With that said, I am not saying Mariota or Winston are bad. I like Mariota a lot. I just think we treat them differently because of how they arrived in their respective roles.

Also, while we often site offensive "weapons" as support for good/bad QB play. I'd argue having a good D, and not playing from behind is a bigger factor. I think the skins D is meh to poor. The Titans meh to good.

It all comes out in the wash I think.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 14.07.2017, 03:29 PM
FallenFlyer's Avatar
FallenFlyer FallenFlyer is offline
All Pro
 
Join Date: 06.09.2013
Posts: 4,844
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by olig23 View Post
It terms of the "traditional stats" I agree.

However, if you have Gamepass, go watch the first four games of this season with the Titans. He's poor. doesn't really show up on the stat line, but he's poor. He was great at times too. But it's that inconsistency he needs to iron out. And not all players improve as we are often led to think they do. So he's got thing to prove.

With that said, I am not saying Mariota or Winston are bad. I like Mariota a lot. I just think we treat them differently because of how they arrived in their respective roles.

Also, while we often site offensive "weapons" as support for good/bad QB play. I'd argue having a good D, and not playing from behind is a bigger factor. I think the skins D is meh to poor. The Titans meh to good.

It all comes out in the wash I think.
I'll point out now that I am very much in the camp of 'Washington should have signed Cousins to a deal last off season' so much of this is more theorising on the Redskins perspective.

As for, watch X games, Cousins final three outings last year were not his best. He threw for a lot of yards against Carolina and showed a real lack of authority in the redzone. This was reinforced against the Bears despite the win as 2 critical touchdowns came via his legs and then his two INTs against the Giants arguably cost them the game and a playoff berth.

(There is a player called Clayton Thorson (Northwestern) who I think may well be the QB to rise in this year's draft process. He reminds me massively of Cousins so I happen to have watched a few of his games recently)

Unfortunately for Cousins, people tend to remember a players final appearance opposed to the early ones which gives everything a slightly different slant. As undeserving as that may be.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 14.07.2017, 06:12 PM
boknows34's Avatar
boknows34 boknows34 is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 03.03.2006
Posts: 15,471
Default

If Mike Glennon can earn $15m on the open market then I'd say $25m for a franchise QB is actually a bargain. That $10m is the difference between 5-11 and looking for another unproven QB in the draft or a playoff team at 11-5. A lot of teams waste more than $10m every year in cap space on dead money alone.

The reason it isn't more than $25m is that franchise QBs in their prime never reach the open market. How much do you think cap rich teams like the Browns or 49ers would offer an Aaron Rodgers, Derek Carr or Russell Wilson if they were unrestricted free agents? $40m at least I'd say. Perhaps even more.

The salary cap increases again this season by $12m to $167m. By the time the Raiders move to Vegas in 2020, Carr's cap hit will be $20m while the cap could realistically reach $200m by then. Paying a franchise QB approx 10-15% of the cap is a steal.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +0. The time now is 11:59 AM.