Kirk Cousins Stuff

[MKnight82]

1 minute ago, lavar703 said:

This is basically what I've been saying from the start. Why people keep saying "the redskins had to do this" is beyond me? Nothing about this move was sensible. This was the same stupid thing they've been doing for years.

They did it because Bruce Allen and Jay Gruden's jobs can't survive another rebuild.  This is why the second they knew Cousins wasn't coming back Allen should have been fired and a new GM hired.  You can't give a guy desperate to save his job the ability to make long term decisions.  

[Slappy Mc]

Its silly to me at this point, that people think the Redskins should chance going into FA or the draft to find our answer at QB. At worst Alex Smith is a lateral move from Kirk Cousins. You will not get that with any other option, period. Of course you could take a chance and draft a QB, but you a banking a season on an unknown. Alex Smith being in DC enables the Redskins to use a much later pick (than a first round pick) to draft a development QB. 

It sucks to lose Kendall Fuller, it also sucks to lose our third round pick, but the benefit of having Smith (who wants to be in DC) on the roster out ways the loss in my opinion.

The Redskins are not looking to "rebuild," what most of you are suggesting is to rebuild. Have you not had enough rebuilding? I agree with Jay Gruden. It is very reaffirming that we have stability at the QB position for the next 4 years. 

If Alex Smith does well in Washington, I hope that all of you that are complaining so much about the trade eat some crow.

[MKnight82]

18 minutes ago, Slappy Mc said:

Its silly to me at this point, that people think the Redskins should chance going into FA or the draft to find our answer at QB. At worst Alex Smith is a lateral move from Kirk Cousins. You will not get that with any other option, period. Of course you could take a chance and draft a QB, but you a banking a season on an unknown. Alex Smith being in DC enables the Redskins to use a much later pick (than a first round pick) to draft a development QB. 

It sucks to lose Kendall Fuller, it also sucks to lose our third round pick, but the benefit of having Smith (who wants to be in DC) on the roster out ways the loss in my opinion.

The Redskins are not looking to "rebuild," what most of you are suggesting is to rebuild. Have you not had enough rebuilding? I agree with Jay Gruden. It is very reaffirming that we have stability at the QB position for the next 4 years. 

If Alex Smith does well in Washington, I hope that all of you that are complaining so much about the trade eat some crow.

He’s going to have to do a lot more than do “well” to make this trade worth it.  

[Woz]

19 hours ago, Thaiphoon said:

19 hours ago, oldman9er said:

Smart, okay. Doesn't it tick you off a bit that he wanted out of DC so badly? As a fan, I'd prefer people that actually want to be on my team.

I'd prefer them to want to be here too. So yes, the fan in me is not happy.

But the realist/pessimist in me understands that if I had to work in a toxic organization like this one, I'd want out too. So in that respect, I really can't blame him

One thing that the "Kirk is greedy" crowd seems to be missing:

This is Kirk's first chance to choose where he gets to play since he's been in the NFL, and first time he gets to choose at all since he was a high school senior.

[Woz]

19 hours ago, Slappy Mc said:

So if you made 50 Million in two years you would feel that somehow negotiating a contract for lets say 24M/Year is going to hurt your pockets. Seriously, how people defend these athletes who make millions of dollars and whine about not getting paid enough, or about anything at all is laughable to me.

Question: why is explaining (not necessarily defending, but at least looking at it from the player's viewpoint) why certain athletes ask/demand millions of dollars laughable, while allowing the billionaires who would have to pay them get away without any repercussions?

[turtle28]

17 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

He’s going to have to do a lot more than do “well” to make this trade worth it.  

Define “well.” Say his stats are similar to what Cousins have been again over the next 3 to 5 years and we go to the playoffs and win some games.

Is that well enough, or does he have to win a super bowl?

[MikeT14]

2 minutes ago, turtle28 said:

Define “well.” Say his stats are similar to what Cousins have been again over the next 3 to 5 years and we go to the playoffs and win some games.

Getting a DC team to the conference championship game is well enough for me

[turtle28]

2 minutes ago, MikeT14 said:

Getting a DC team to the conference championship game is well enough for me

Me too, but I’d honestly just take some playoff wins. We haven’t had one since 05-06 and that wasn’t because of the qb play. That happened because of Sean Taylor, the rest of the defense and of course Portis.

[Woz]

6 hours ago, Eric said:

I never will say giving up fuller was a good idea. Actually I was pissed about it. But how can we blame the skins for doing it? Cousins forced our hand I believe when he wouldnt even talk to us until new league year started.

After two years of below market offers, why are you surprised that he and his team didn't want to negotiate without having other options on the table? The Redskins did this to themselves.

6 hours ago, Eric said:

We weren't getting smith for nothing. You would agree if you go into the season without a good quarterback you might as well not go into it at all. We had to have a solution at that position.

While it's true that if the Redskins had gone into the season with Colt McCoy or some other stop gap player they likely would have lost, they didn't have to make a trade and certainly not in January. Smith was almost assuredly going to be cut once the 2018 league year began. They could have signed him then for the same price and kept Fuller and your third. Or, if they missed out on Smith, they could have gone with Bridgewater.

Instead, they panicked.

Note this has nothing to do with whether Smith or Cousins is better. It's about the actions of the front office once the calendar flipped over to January.

[Thaiphoon]

2 hours ago, Slappy Mc said:

It's both. You can argue it all you want, but they keep stats for it.

Just because they keep stats on it doesn' mean squat. 

2016, Kirk play lights out against Dallas on Thanksgiving. The defense and ST gives the game away.

Same year, he runs it in for the go ahead TD with a minute to play against the Lions. The defense gives up the game.

So Kirk takes an L on those? That's ok by you?

[turtle28]

1 minute ago, Thaiphoon said:

Just because they keep stats on it doesn' mean squat. 

2016, Kirk play lights out against Dallas on Thanksgiving. The defense and ST gives the game away.

Same year, he runs it in for the go ahead TD with a minute to play against the Lions. The defense gives up the game.

So Kirk takes an L on those? That's ok by you?

Agreed And Smith should get this same leeway if it happens to him.

[Eric]

I disagree with the lowball offer statement. Kirk hasn't really done enough to warrant a big contract. You can't wait until the new league starts if you wanted a certain qb , your competition for that players services only cost more each time another team gets in a bidding war. That's fact. You think the Jets, Minnesota or Denver don't wish the other didnt want Cousins ? Your only kidding yourself with an unrealistic perception. We had to give up fuller for smith and a 3rd. What if Minnesota or Denver are left out of Cousins sweepstakes? I bet they give up a lot more than we did to move up in the draft for a qb. That's scarier than what we did for Smith. We learned our lesson from RG3 trade, it still haunts us. 

Also Bridgewater and Keenum for Minnesota are not guaranteed to want to come back there after the push the vikes are making for Cousins. I bet they won't feel truly wanted and we know how butt hurt a player can be if they don't feel wanted.

To end this saga it's good to know we're ending our nightmare and some teams are just beginning theirs.

[Slappy Mc]

26 minutes ago, Woz said:

Question: why is explaining (not necessarily defending, but at least looking at it from the player's viewpoint) why certain athletes ask/demand millions of dollars laughable, while allowing the billionaires who would have to pay them get away without any repercussions?

define "get away"? Are you asking why the owners are not vilified for paying these athletes millions of dollars? Absolutely these owners are greedy. 

[lavar703]

Yeah, I don't get the "Kirk is greedy" stuff either. It's his job. Stop thinking in terms of being a fan and realize this is his 9-5.

[e16bball]

11 minutes ago, Woz said:

While it's true that if the Redskins had gone into the season with Colt McCoy or some other stop gap player they likely would have lost, they didn't have to make a trade and certainly not in January. Smith was almost assuredly going to be cut once the 2018 league year began. They could have signed him then for the same price and kept Fuller and your third. Or, if they missed out on Smith, they could have gone with Bridgewater.

Instead, they panicked.

I’m not going to deny the real possibility that this ends up as a “winner’s curse” scenario — but it’s just not true that he was “almost assuredly going to be cut once the 2018 league year began.”

Per CBS Sports, there were at least 6 other teams involved in the bidding for Smith. Had we called their “bluff,” they wouldn’t have been forced to cut him, making him available for us to sign freely. They could (and would) have simply traded him to someone else for a marginally lesser offer. 

Whether we should have walked away and gone with a different option is another discussion entirely. But there was no scenario where the Redskins could have gotten Alex Smith if they’d just had the steely nerve to stare down the Chiefs and force them to cut him. He was getting traded, it was just a question of to whom.