Alex Smith to be traded to Washington for 3rd round pick and CB Kendall Fuller; agrees to extension

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, iPwn said:

The date they need it does not matter.

As soon as they offer the contract, he’s on the books. He doesn’t have to sign, they still have to allot the money for him. Meaning they get no time to negotiate unless he signs, which he won’t, because he doesn’t have to.

Washington can go ahead and hold that 35 million in their pocket if they want, but congrats on losing out on all those players they could have signed.

Unless I'm mistaken, his franchise tag is his 2018 contract not his 2017 contract, which means the Redskins don't have to be cap compliant until March 14th at 4 PM EST or whatever deadline I said it was earlier.  The Cowboys are always in the red in future years, but they don't have to be in the green until the contracts rollver.

[Packerraymond]

I'll break it down as simple as possible:

Team tags player and has use for him on next year's roster = team has all leverage over player.

Team tags player and has no intention of him being on next year's roster = player has all leverage on team.

If Cousins wants to be a FA, he'll be a FA. Washington has literally no leverage via trade or over Cousins.

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, squire12 said:

WAS and DEN/JAX or another team can negotiate the terms of a pick/player compensation all they want.  It still comes down to Cousins agreeing to a deal with said team when he chooses to do so.  

And again I'll ask, what motivation does Kirk Cousins have to hold off on his long-term security?  If trying to bend the Redskins over a barrel is your only argument, it's not much of an argument.

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, Packerraymond said:

I'll break it down as simple as possible:

Team tags player and has use for him on next year's roster = team has all leverage over player.

Team tags player and has no intention of him being on next year's roster = player has all leverage on team.

If Cousins wants to be a FA, he'll be a FA. Washington has literally no leverage via trade or over Cousins.

You're making an incredibly huge presumption that Cousins is going to hold the Redskins hostage by not negotiating a long-term deal with another team.  Why would he do that?

[Packerraymond]

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

As I've said, they've got enough cap space to swallow his franchise tag.  It just hampers their maneuverability.  And I personally believe that 3 weeks is more than enough time to hammer out an amicable deal.  Of course Cousins is going to be pissed, he got franchised again.  That doesn't means that a deal can't be made.  The reason a deal will be made is because the Redskins aren't paying Alex Smith and Kirk Cousins a combined $50M.  That leverage wasn't there in previous years.

So what you're saying in the last two sentences is the Redskins have no leverage over Cousins. They tagged him, cannot possibly afford to keep him and have no intention of him being apart of the 2018 team. So why is he signing his tag? Sounds to me like he has an easy ticket to FA.

[squire12]

9 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I really don't think you're getting what I'm saying.  Let me simplify it.

 February 20th - Franchise Tag Opens
March 6th (at 4 PM EST) - Franchise Tag Closes

During this period, the Redskins can effectively go around to 31 other franchises and say we're franchising Kirk Cousins, if you want to negotiate a long-term deal with us then you'll have to negotiate a compensation package that they'll take.  Since Kirk Cousins is still technically under his 2017 contract, he's not allowed to discuss FA deal with any team.

March 12th-14th - FA may negotiate contracts, but not officially sign them.

This is the first time that Kirk Cousins can negotiate with other teams, which means he'll get an idea of what his FA market is.  Prior to this point, the only negotiations he can make are ones which the Redskins sign off on.  So if the Broncos negotiate a trade package for him, they're the only team who can negotiate with Cousins from March 6th until March 12th.

I get the timeline just fine.  

 

What you are missing is that Cousins in not obligated to do anything other than what he wants, when he wants, with who he wants.  He has the leverage in the process once WAS would tag him.

Option 1:  He says no to every LTD and signs the tag.   WAS is on the hook for $35M for COusins and $20+ for Smith.  They have no FA money or rookie money without making cuts

Option 2:  Cousins gets tagged and agrees with another team right away.  WAS gets the pick

Option 3:  Cousins gets tagged, takes his time agreeing to a team until April 1st.  Was gets the pick, but loses out on all the prime and 2nd tier FA

Option 4:  WAS lets Cousins go to UFA and collects the 2019 highest comp pick.

 

You are opting for option 2 and risking options 1 and 3 which has much more significant consequences vs option 4 which is what @Packerraymond and I are trying to show you

 

There may be other options, but those are the main ones IMO

Edited February 1, 2018 by squire12

[Packerraymond]

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

You're making an incredibly huge presumption that Cousins is going to hold the Redskins hostage by not negotiating a long-term deal with another team.  Why would he do that?

To be a FA for the one millionth time. That's what anyone wants in the NFL if it's clear their tenure is done with the current team. Why in the world would he want to limit himself to negotiating with one team, the team the Redskins choose for him, when he can choose his own team out of the 31 other franchises?

[CWood21]

Just now, Packerraymond said:

So what you're saying in the last two sentences is the Redskins have no leverage over Cousins. They tagged him, cannot possibly afford to keep him and have no intention of him being apart of the 2018 team. So why is he signing his tag? Sounds to me like he has an easy ticket to FA.

We're not arguing who has more leverage between Cousins and the Redskins.  We're arguing who has more leverage.  Despite your opinion otherwise, the Redskins do have some leverage by franchise tagging him.  They pick and choose who Kirk Cousins can negotiate with.  That's leverage for the Redskins.  Kirk Cousins has leverage by not negotiating.  That's leverage for Kirk Cousins.  Obviously, there's more motivation for the Redskins to strike a deal with one of the teams to free themselves from the tag contract.  There's a reason both sides have a reason to get a deal done.

[pwny]

Just now, CWood21 said:

Unless I'm mistaken, his franchise tag is his 2018 contract not his 2017 contract, which means the Redskins don't have to be cap compliant until March 14th at 4 PM EST or whatever deadline I said it was earlier.  The Cowboys are always in the red in future years, but they don't have to be in the green until the contracts rollver.

Yes. This does not matter though.

- Washington tags Cousins today.

- Cousins doesn’t sign

- Washington loses $35M of cap space

- No team can negotiate with Cousins in “window”

- Washington opens Free Agency with 35M in cap space being taken up by a player they don’t have signed and don’t intend to play

- Washington loses out on blue chip players that they could have signed

How is this good for Washington?

[Packerraymond]

Just now, CWood21 said:

We're not arguing who has more leverage between Cousins and the Redskins.  We're arguing who has more leverage.  Despite your opinion otherwise, the Redskins do have some leverage by franchise tagging him.  They pick and choose who Kirk Cousins can negotiate with.  That's leverage for the Redskins.  Kirk Cousins has leverage by not negotiating.  That's leverage for Kirk Cousins.  Obviously, there's more motivation for the Redskins to strike a deal with one of the teams to free themselves from the tag contract.  There's a reason both sides have a reason to get a deal done.

The only reason Kirk has to sign the tag is if the Skins work out a trade with the team he wanted to sign with in FA most and they've offered him a deal that is what he expected on the FA market.

Anything other than that scenario occurs and there isn't a single reason why he should sign that tag.

[pwny]

4 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

You're making an incredibly huge presumption that Cousins is going to hold the Redskins hostage by not negotiating a long-term deal with another team.  Why would he do that?

Because they’d be holding him hostage. Telling him that he can’t sign where he wants, but that he has to sign with a team that gives them adequate compensation? Why would he play nice with them when they’re trying to dictate where he goes?

[CWood21]

Just now, squire12 said:

You are opting for option 2 and risking options 1 and 3 which has much more significant consequences vs option 4 which is what @Packerraymond and I are trying to show you

I'll just go down this option.

Option 1 - Kirk Cousins isn't going to come back to Washington to be the backup to Alex Smith.  Someone will give, likely Washington.
Option 2 - Viable.
Option 3 - Possible, but unlikely.  Both sides want resolution to this.
Option 4 - Posible, but not preferable.

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, iPwn said:

How is this good for Washington?

You're missing my whole argument.  My argument that the only way this is an issue is if Kirk Cousins decides to give one last F you to the Redskins and hold out.  Why would he do that? 

[squire12]

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

We're not arguing who has more leverage between Cousins and the Redskins.  We're arguing who has more leverage.  Despite your opinion otherwise, the Redskins do have some leverage by franchise tagging him.  They pick and choose who Kirk Cousins can negotiate with.  That's leverage for the Redskins.  Kirk Cousins has leverage by not negotiating.  That's leverage for Kirk Cousins.  Obviously, there's more motivation for the Redskins to strike a deal with one of the teams to free themselves from the tag contract.  There's a reason both sides have a reason to get a deal done.

You are forgetting the 3rd in the process.   Cousins would need to agree to a long term deal with the new team in order for WAS to get the compensation from the new team.   In the recent Alex Smith to WAS, CLE offered a better draft pick package, but would not do a long term deal with Smith, and WAS would, thus KC took the WAS deal

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, iPwn said:

Because they’d be holding him hostage. Telling him that he can’t sign where he wants, but that he has to sign with a team that gives them adequate compensation? Why would he play nice with them when they’re trying to dictate where he goes?

They're not holding him hostage.  As we've already discussed ad nauseam, Kirk Cousins has more leverage than the Redskins, which means the Redskins will blink first.  Do you think that the Redskins won't come to an amicable in the 3 weeks before FA opens that nets the Redskins compensation and sends Cousins to a team he wants to play for?  I don't have any reason to believe that Cousins is going to hold the Redskins hostage.  Maybe I'm more optimistic than you.