turtle28 Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 On 2/12/2018 at 10:21 PM, Thaiphoon said: If they can do it, then its a good thing. It goes back to my stance that Kirk isn't going to sign that tag unless he has control over where he goes. Well of course, I don’t think anyone had disputed that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceinthehouse Posted February 14, 2018 Author Share Posted February 14, 2018 I was over on a browns board earlier & read that they offered not 1, but 2 2nd rd picks for Alex Smith. On a 1 yr deal... They didn't want to offer him a long term deal. We stepped in and offered a long term deal & added Fuller, with our 3rd rd pick & got him. There were 3 teams interested. Denver, Washington & the Browns. (Denver offered 2nd & Talib) so if Cleveland, Denver, Jets, Arizona, Jacksonville, Minnesota, Buffalo & say... a mystery team are interested in trading for Kirk Cousins? That's 8 teams... (I think there could be as many as 10) We could be very surprised, in what compensation we would receive. It's gonna be exciting.. I also think that Bruce, Snyder and staff know that Cousins will be in high demand Which I why they'll take the risk & tag him. what's REALLY funny though? Any and every opposing team forum i visit? All assume that all they got to do, is sign him. That he'll be a free agent and to get him! Most the talk, what kind of contract demand will he want? How much he'll cost. None even imagine, they'll have to trade draft resources to get him. None believe we can, nor we wont even Franchise Tag him. I think many are in for a big surprise & are about to eat a big crap burger. When we do it! Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 2 hours ago, turtle28 said: Well of course, I don’t think anyone had disputed that. Actually, it was disputed. Posters here and elsewhere have said we should just ship Kirk out wherever we want to via the tag n trade. My point has always been that if he is not allowed to pick where he wants to play next year, he ain't signing the tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 19 hours ago, Dashing202 said: I doubt he's gonna think that way . Many fans keep assuming Kirk hates the redskins . If anything his agent has the beef with Allen . a second rounder is good for teams that " NEED " a QB and still can use there first for something else . Like come on a second rounder on a multi year deal for a probowl qb is a good bargain. It saves them the trouble of drafting one in the top ten . You're missing the point Dash. If I'm Kirk, why would I intentionally harm the team I'm going to? If the Broncos come calling with a 2nd and 3rd rounder (just for giggles let's assume this is the comp), why would Kirk agree to the tag n trade when he can play this out, get released, STILL sign with Denver and the Broncos can still draft starters in the 2nd and 3rd round? Or the Redskins can simply let him go and he can sign with Denver and then they still have those picks to make the team he's going to much better. You're looking at this like Kirk is taking it out on the Redskins. I'm looking at it like Kirk is going to want the team he goes to, to be able to draft more starters on both sides of the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 12 hours ago, oldman9er said: I look at it more like the receiving team asking these questions. Is a day 2 pick worth more to me than a proven QB that will make all of us feel like we are really going to compete this year? With so few quality QBotF options ready to start, do I really feel like gambling that a team with more resources outbids us for the only one with some real longevity available? All for a day 2 pick thrown in? .. and then the Redskins can ask themselves, Is it really worth the gamble to tag him and fight for that day 2 pick? Tell ya, I'm not losing any sleep over the will they or won't they game here. Only that it's of minor interest in an otherwise interest-lacking past couple of weeks. I can see the reasons to or not to, but if they can tag, make some calls, and then rescind if nothing pans out? then I ask, why not? Once they tag him, the tag hits our books. So they had better have this all worked out (your "make some calls") prior to it. Otherwise, we're going to be harming our team in order to play this game of chicken. Otherwise, I agree with your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 2 hours ago, aceinthehouse said: I was over on a browns board earlier & read that they offered not 1, but 2 2nd rd picks for Alex Smith. On a 1 yr deal... They didn't want to offer him a long term deal. We stepped in and offered a long term deal & added Fuller, with our 3rd rd pick & got him. There were 3 teams interested. Denver, Washington & the Browns. (Denver offered 2nd & Talib) so if Cleveland, Denver, Jets, Arizona, Jacksonville, Minnesota, Buffalo & say... a mystery team are interested in trading for Kirk Cousins? That's 8 teams... (I think there could be as many as 10) We could be very surprised, in what compensation we would receive. It's gonna be exciting.. I also think that Bruce, Snyder and staff know that Cousins will be in high demand Which I why they'll take the risk & tag him. what's REALLY funny though? Any and every opposing team forum i visit? All assume that all they got to do, is sign him. That he'll be a free agent and to get him! Most the talk, what kind of contract demand will he want? How much he'll cost. None even imagine, they'll have to trade draft resources to get him. None believe we can, nor we wont even Franchise Tag him. I think many are in for a big surprise & are about to eat a big crap burger. When we do it! Lol Fantastic! Let's hope it pans out if it, in fact, does pan out. But forgive me if I don't buy into the risk position the team puts itself if they try it. Its like someone you know not saving for retirement and instead spending all their money on scratch off lottery tickets as their "retirement plan". Yeah it may pay off. But the odds don't favor it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoganF89 Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 I doubt he signs but if he does sign it and has a good season and ends up playing on the tag in which is all guarenteed he will get to negotiate with rodgers in the same offseason. if he has just as good of a year then rodgers he could demand even more mulah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 On 2/8/2018 at 7:37 PM, Marcus21 said: No...I think they will use it to guarantee their ability to match offers a Cousins receives in FA (2019). And lock up 25% of their cap space while Kirk negotiates with other teams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 On 2/8/2018 at 7:39 PM, Thaiphoon said: They can argue that the tag was meant for the team to work out a LTD with the player and that it was meant as a way for the team to keep the player. Not get rid of him. Now, the precedent has been set with Cassell a few years ago, so ultimately they will lose. But that doesn't mean they won't drag it out and cause as much pain as possible. The Redskins could go for a summary judgment based on that precedent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 On 2/9/2018 at 6:35 PM, oldman9er said: 1. You tag him. 2. You allow him to talk to specific teams that interest him. 3. Let him hammer out a specific contract agreed upon. 4. Then hammer out fair compensation to the Redskins for circumventing the free for all that is FA. * if all of steps 2-4 fall apart? you rescind the tag, and let him fall into the hungry shark pool of insanity. Is this all feasible and fair enough? or am I being a dummy in forgetting something here? Per the CBA, #2 is forbidden if you use the franchise tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 15 hours ago, aceinthehouse said: We stepped in and offered a long term deal & added Fuller, with our 3rd rd pick & got him. There were 3 teams interested. Denver, Washington & the Browns. (Denver offered 2nd & Talib) Correct me if I'm wrong, but Denver and Cleveland came late into the trading when it was rumored for the Chiefs to be cutting a deal with the Redskins. Also, from Denver's perspective, trading Talib was a salary dump. 15 hours ago, aceinthehouse said: so if Cleveland, Denver, Jets, Arizona, Jacksonville, Minnesota, Buffalo & say... a mystery team are interested in trading for Kirk Cousins? That's 8 teams... (I think there could be as many as 10) Which of those teams does Kirk want to play for? Again, as @Thaiphoon and I have tried to make clear, the Redskins cannot trade Cousins unless they tag him and Cousins signs the tag. If Cousins doesn't want to go to Cleveland, it doesn't matter how much they offer the Redskins because Cousins doesn't have to sign the tag and thus allow the deal to go through. So, of the teams you mentioned, only Minnesota, Denver and Jacksonville make sense for Cousins. Problem is Jacksonville has Bortles and his $19M contract likely is guaranteeing. Denver is cap strapped right now (again, it's why they were trying to deal Talib) and Minnesota has their pick of one of three QBs (maybe two if Bridgewater's contract tolled). Could those teams make a deal? Yes. Will they? That remains to be seen ... especially if they hold back and the suitors that are on the table don't interest Cousins. 16 hours ago, aceinthehouse said: what's REALLY funny though? Any and every opposing team forum i visit? All assume that all they got to do, is sign him. That he'll be a free agent and to get him! Most the talk, what kind of contract demand will he want? How much he'll cost. None even imagine, they'll have to trade draft resources to get him. None believe we can, nor we wont even Franchise Tag him. I think many are in for a big surprise & are about to eat a big crap burger. When we do it! Lol Because any other fanbase can see the giant wart on the nose of this whole situation: the Redskins would be intentionally hurting their own cap in order to try for this speculative pick. If a deal isn't in place before they tag him, then teams will back off. Why? Because they know that when the 2018 League Year begins, the Redskins will be in self-inflicted cap hell. All they need to do then is wait. And given that, why would any team make a deal ahead of time when they have no idea if Cousins wants to go there (remember, they cannot talk to him and he controls if a trade is viable)? Only a desperate team would make a deal, but those franchises are likely less desirable to Cousins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldman9er Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 3 hours ago, Woz said: Per the CBA, #2 is forbidden if you use the franchise tag. Forbidden, perhaps. Done anyway? oh, you bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 39 minutes ago, oldman9er said: Forbidden, perhaps. Done anyway? oh, you bet. Oh good, just what the Redskins need: cause a scenario where they get penalized draft picks by the league. And don't tell me Mara and the Giants wouldn't jump up and down to make it happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldman9er Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 If the team's not going anywhere anyway, why care a lick about forfeited draft picks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 2 hours ago, oldman9er said: If the team's not going anywhere anyway, why care a lick about forfeited draft picks? Because that means they fall further into the quicksand? You seem to think that I want this team to fail miserably. I want this team to be what it once was, what I grew up with: a team that year in and year out was thought to be a top franchise. What frustrates me is that this front office cannot do that. What I don't know is whether replacing Bruce Allen with a competent GM would move the franchise towards that goal (basically, how badly has Snyder ruined any chance of the Redskins ever being a relevant franchise ever again while he is the owner? (yes, I fear that I already know the answer, but I have hope that maybe I'm wrong)). However, I do know that it will never move towards that goal with Allen in charge. Doing stupid crap is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.