DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Would you accept Cousins, Sequon & Minkah (Or OT, DE, WR, etc.)

Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't think Cousins is all that good. I'd rather start fresh with Rosen.

However, if the Browns signed Cousins, and drafted two of these three - B.Chubb, Barkley, Fitzpatrick - that wouldn't be the worse thing.

I used to be in this camp also. Cousins, finally, won me over this year. I watched multiple games where he got rocked just as he was releasing the pass and it was perfectly placed. I believe he has what it takes to be a pretty good (in the Matthew Stafford, Derek "When Healthy" Carr, Eli Manning range) QB in the league over the next several years. QBs like him rarely hit the open market, which is why I don't see Washington letting him walk. And even so, as I said above, there are about ten teams he should/could pick before us.

Cousins would be treated like a king here and the ability to use these wasted QB prospect picks on other high end offensive starters could turn us around overnight. I would think about it hard if I was him.

As a fan I would rather have a proven starter than a rookie that might work out.

Missing with the #1 pick in the draft is something that would devastate the franchise?

It didn't the last 6 or 7 times, it just sets the future back farther.

Dude, you have NO IDEA what Cousins thinks about Cleveland, Jackson, Williams, Dorsey, Highsmith, Gordon, Duke, Thomas, Bitonio, Zeitler. NONE.

That's what pisses me and others off about you people constantly spewing this BS about no player will want to come to Cleveland.

Tell that to Collins, Kirksey, Bitonio, Zeitler.

We are SOOO damn close to exploding onto the scene, even if some Air Head fans can't see it.

Back to the question.

Cal. I'd take those 3 in a heartbeat and not look back.

Collins is the ONLY QB that would allow us to pass on any QB.

We'd be Stupid and waste a valuable asset if we ink Cousins AND take a QB at #1. That makes ZERO sense.

Trade him later? How bout trade him NOW. For a HUGE package. I'm talking Denver at 5. And we STILL end up with 2 of Barkley, Fitz, Chubb. Ward, #1 OT.

I saw him look mediocre multiple times this season on a more than frequent basis that would make me uncomfortable signing him and passing on Rosen.

Here is my order of preference.

1. Trade for Smith, draft Rosen.
2. Draft Rosen, hopefully sign a vet for the QB room.
3. Cousins and two of these three - B. Chubb, Barkley, Fitzpatrick.
4. Darnold (although I just don't see it with this guy at all, outside of maybe 4 passes a game that look nice).
5. Trade for Smith, draft Allen (this makes me cringe, but it would be my 5th choice).

Nowhere on my list is Mayfield.

Here is my order of preference.

Dream scenario
1. Sign Cousins, Sign Bell(pipe dream), draft Fitz, Draft Orlando Brown, draft the best FS(Derwin James), OLB(Hubbard), WR(Ateman/Cobbs) available in the 2nd.


2. Draft Rosen, Draft Barkley, draft the best FS, T, CB in the 2nd. Sign a vet QB, sign Pryor.

3. Trade for Smith, draft Barkley, draft Fitz sign Pryor, draft the best FS T DE/OLB in the 2nd.

J/C

I have this sick feeling in my stomach that Ben Retires and the Steelers sign Cousins to keep their SB hopes alive going forward.

I think they try to get Allen if the Donks don't grab him.

I see a lot of varied opinions. Several scenarios capable of improving the team. But there is no scenario in my perfect world that includes signing Cousins at the expense of drafting Rosen or Darnold. I would take McCown or McCarron over that scenario.

JMHO

I don't have one! Way too many variables at present. I'll put my faith in Dorsey & Co and trust that they don't sacrifice long term sustainability for a few short term wins...

What is the fasination with a rookie QB who is unproven and will need time to develop, if he ever does, instead of going after a proven veteran? I am not talking about a lower teer bridge QB but a proven veteran like Smith or Cousins or Keenum or Bridgewater. Someone who can hit the ground running and help us start building a winning tradition. We could use our draft picks to get some much needed playmakers. I would much rather go that route than hope a rookie QB will develop into a franchise QB. We all know our past history on that. Just my thoughts on building a winner sooner.

Smith & Cousins aren't the same, Bridgewater & Keenum aren't the same. Each offers a different set of circumstances. First, I doubt Bridgewater & Keenum are leaving the Vikes. Bradford would appear to be the odd man out.

As for the rest of my reasoning, you can refer back to my earlier posts. I don't misunderstand your opinion, I just don't happen to agree with signing Cousins over drafting Rosen or Darnold. Trading for Smith, or picking him up if he's cut, doesn't have the same restriction, IMO. We've seen both their ceilings. And if Cousins is so great, why didn't they make the playoffs. Tough to do with a very pedestrian 7-9 record. So there's that.

At the time, getting Cousins in FA followed by Barkley and Fitz or some such awesome duo at the top of the first, would feel like a slam dunk. And maybe Dorsey would hit on a future QB in the 2nd round.

But with our history, I could easily see us eventually lamenting not drafting one of the QBs at the top. AGAIN.

I don't see HOW we don't go QB at the top thus losing the luxury of drafting Barkley. Assuming he's gone by pick 4.

I don't think the Vikings will be able to keep two of the three. They are all going to want decent contracts.

must be nice to have 3 starters on your team

This is another mis-informed statement.

"We all know our past history on that"?

NO WE DON'T..

What we DO KNOW is that we continually try to make something out of the CRAP that is Quinn, Weeden, Manziel and the likes.

We DO NOT RUIN QB'S. What we do is fail with QB'S who SUCK from the get go. HUGE difference.

Darnold and Rosen are the BEST we've been offered since the return.

Literally every off-season I say I don't think free agents to sign with the Browns is a problem. For the most part all these guys care about is money. But when every is offering you a ton of money you start to look at everything else. A person would have to be blind to not see that we are in a horrible spot given that situation. We have no stability and the worst ownership.

I think they can exercise Bridgewater's fifth year option. I don't know what they'll do about Keenum. In their particular situation, possibly uncertain about Teddy's durability, they may be forced to work out deals with them both.

I thought that had to be done before now and they declined Bridgewater's.
Not sure just vaguely remember

You might be right, I'm not sure either. I didn't see that they declined. If they did decline, does that make him a UFA in 2108?

I was just giving my opinion on the quickest and safest way to get this losing turned around. In my opinion no rookie is guaranteed to turn into a franchise QB where as getting Cousins or Smith or even Bridgewater and Keenum, they have all proven themselves in the NFL. If Andrew Luck was coming out of the draft I would think different but I am not that high on this class of QBs that I would rather have one of them over Cousins or Smith. We already have Kiser who has all the physical tool plus is smart. Let him sit and learn for a few years while we start winning some games and become respectable and possibly make the playoffs. I know a lot of people on here don't like Kiser but I see something in him. He needs some time to learn from a quality veteran. Plus not taking a QB high will let us focus on drafting more playmakers at other positions. Like I said this would be my plan.

Like I said, I understand your plan, I just don't agree with it. I've seen us pass on franchise QBs too many time because they had it all figured out, or the guys weren't good enough, or they needed more picks, or whatever. I don't want to see the Browns do that again. I do see great potential in Rosen & Darnold, and don't want a fragile Teddy, a one-year Keenum, or mediocre Cousins or Smith if that means passing on a top QB in this draft. If you don't agree, that's fine. We'll see how it all turns out.

I am not sure what people mean by 'franchise' QB. But, Cousins and Alex Smith are top 15 QBs.

Any draft pick is nothing more then a roll of the dice.

To me the choice is simple.

There is a reason why some teams trade picks to acquire establish QBs.

C'mon man.

Franchise QB is a QB that is the FACE of Your FRANCHISE.

When you think of a team, you THINK;

Brady
Rodgers
Roethlisberger
Newton
Ryan
Brees
Luck

It ain't that difficult.

Eli (who is not that good anymore)? Rivers? Wentz? Garoppolo?

The mere fact that you chose to respond about the definition of franchise QB rather then the main topic of the post is a testament to the ambiguous definition of 'franchise' QB.

Its a meaningless media term that different people use to mean different things.

I don't know the universal definition of a "franchise qb."

I just know what I think of when I am speaking of a franchise qb. And before people go off, I am not saying I am right. It's just my opinion of the situation.

I think a franchise qb is when you have a guy that you are not trying to replace and are willing to role w/for multiple years. Of course, that could change as time progresses if the dude regresses.

I don't think it means he has to have certain stats. He doesn't have to be top 3 qb, top 5, top 10, top 15, whatever.

I just think it means he is "your guy" and you are not looking to replace him.

Again, that is just my opinion and I don't think there is a true universal definition.

I'd argue Cousins is top 10. For the last three years he's throw north of 4,000 yards, north of 25 touchdowns and south of 15 interceptions. He's also rushed in at least four touchdowns in each of those three seasons.

The numbers are pretty incredible for a team that has strangely done a lot of twisting and changing, admittedly some due to injury, but they've had a lot of overturn around him.

I agree with you vers

I don't think Andy Dalton is a good Qb but I do think that he is the Bengals franchise QB

A Franchise QB is any QB who can or probably will, when accounting for younger players, start for a Franchise for at least 5 years. Someone you can build a 5 year plan around.

Pay close attention and it's clear to see what Kirk Cousins really wants

JP Finlay, NBC Sports Washington•January 7, 2018

If it wasn't obvious before, it sure is now: Kirk Cousins wants to hit free agency.

Unfettered, free to the market. Capitalism in its purest form.

And why shouldn't he? As the Redskins quarterback has repeatedly explained, Cousins has not been able to pick where he played football since 2008. That was when he elected to attend Michigan State for college. As a professional, he's been forced to play for the Redskins since 2012.

He will turn 30 in August, and wants to shape his future. Cousins explained his decision will not be just about money, but control.

"Money is not the driving factor in this decision to go another 16 games," Cousins said last week in a radio event with 106.7 the Fan's Grant and Danny. "It's just not what I've built my life on. That's not what it's about."

RELATED: STILL NO COACHING CHANGES

What does that mean for the Redskins?

Trouble.

Cousins talked at length last week with about his future (video above), and while he didn't make much clear, he doubled down on a position Redskins fans should remember.

In 2017, Cousins and his representatives decided not to engage in contract negotiations with the Redskins. Washington made an offer that included $54 million guaranteed and showed Cousins the Redskins "were all in last summer."

Still, despite his team being "all in," Cousins and his camp decided not to talk about a long-term deal. Instead, the QB played on a one-year deal that paid him $24 million.

That wasn't the first time Cousins eschewed a multi-year deal with Washington.

Speaking last week, Cousins explained that late in the 2015 season, the Redskins tried to sign their passer to a contract extension. As Cousins tells the story, the offer came before the Redskins played the Bears in early December 2015. His agent, Mike McCartney, told the quarterback to turn down the offer.

"Going into this game, I'm thinking I kind of like the comfort and security the Redskins are offering. But Mike said, you don't want to do this, you want to go play this out and then go from there. Well, I was the NFC Offensive Player of the Month those last four games, we won all four and we went to the playoffs and the rest is history."

As for "the rest is history," well, Cousins is right.

Since refuting the Redskins' offer in 2015, the organization has twice used a franchise tag to keep Cousins. In turn, he's made $44 million the last two seasons, more than almost every other NFL player during the same time.

Washington should have made a stronger effort in 2016 to sign Cousins before using the first franchise tag. The team didn't, and it was a big mistake.

RELATED: KIRK DENVER BOUND?

In 2017, however, the team tried. Cousins wouldn't talk, even though he admitted the offer was legitimate.

In 2018, is it even worth trying for the Redskins?

The evidence is clear: Cousins wants to be a free agent.

Cousins' self-described timeline for negotiations will force Washington team president Bruce Allen to use either another franchise tag or a transition tag before the deadline in early March. While Redskins head coach Jay Gruden has made clear he doesn't want his quarterback playing on another one-year deal, Cousins reiterated that he doesn't mind.

"I'm OK with a one-year deal. It doesn't scare me a whole lot, I'm OK with it, I think it's a very fair contract and I don't have any quarrel with it so I would just sign and go play football," he said.

Everybody knows what's at stake. The Redskins could lose their franchise record holder for passing yards in a season, and the first QB to ever start 16 games three years in a row. He has said almost all the right things, but Cousins has never truly commited to the Redskins. Washington has made multiple missteps in the process, but at this point, it seems that Cousins' priority is testing the market and controlling his future. In 2018, or beyond.

Either tag him, or Cousins will hit free agency.

And that's exactly what the quarterback wants.

Link

JC



Is it just me, or is it becoming painfully obvious that Cousins is hitting free agency?

Kirk Cousins wants to stay a Redskin but 'under the right set of circumstances'
By NBC Sports Washington January 26, 2017 12:59 PM

As speculation continues to swirl around Kirk Cousins’ future with the Washington Redskins, the quarterback offered his own — albeit slightly vague — thoughts on the subject on SportsCenter this morning.

Without mentioning the words “franchise tag,” Cousins emphasized the importance of continuity with a team, saying he would love to remain with the Redskins, but that’s conditional.

“I’d love to be able to help build Washington and bring them back to the days of the Hogs and those championships,” he said. “So that’s certainly what we’re always striving for, and, under the right set of circumstances, I would love to be back.”

So what exactly are those “right set of circumstances,” and how should that ambiguity be understood?

The go-to interpretation is the financial side of his unrestricted free agency. The Redskins have more than a month to put a franchise tag on Cousins before working on a long-term deal, which team president Bruce Allen said is the ultimate goal in this situation.

If Washington doesn’t tag him or offer him a long-term contract, there are a number of teams that could scoop him up.

“There’s a lot of guys who finish the season and are free agents, and they don’t know what’s going to happen,” Cousins said. “Fortunately, in my situation, I think there will be some teams that are interested.”

But if the right circumstances for Cousins aren’t financial, what are they?

While he would love to bring the Redskins back to their glory days, it’s also possible the right circumstances mean having the right team to do that, especially because he talked of continuity and strong team relationships.

Although the offense isn’t expected to change much next season, having Matt Cavanaugh replace Sean McVay will still be an adjustment. So maybe Cousins is just looking for some consistency in what could be his third year as a starter.

Whatever happens, Cousins acknowledged this uncertainty is part of the business and he’s not too worried.

“I feel good about what’s going to transpire here going forward.”

http://www.nbcsports.com/washington/wash...t-circumstances

I was thinking after listening to Cousins that Washington was low on his list of options.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/27535...amming-national

We have the most money among teams that need a QB. This is not that hard.

Kirk Cousins Would Reportedly 'Seriously Consider' Playing for Browns

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/27535...ying-for-browns

Kirk Cousins is apparently not intimidated by the Cleveland Browns' quarterback graveyard.

During an appearance on 92.3 The Fan on Wednesday, Albert Breer of the MMQB reported Cousins would "seriously consider" the Browns if he hit free agency (h/t Kyle Kelly of Browns Wire).

Cousins, 29, could be an unrestricted free agent in March if he's unable to reach a contract agreement with Washington. He has played each of the last two seasons under the franchise tag, making the potential for a third tag seem unlikely.

Washington would have to pay Cousins $34.5 million under the franchise tag. The transition tag, which would require a $28 million salary, is also a possibility.

Washington coach Jay Gruden told Dan Steinberg of the Washington Post he does not want Cousins back on another one-year deal.

"I think something has to be done. I personally don't want to go through another one-year deal, and just [keep going] one year, one year," Gruden said. "I think you want to have a quarterback in here that's going to be here. And hopefully that is Kirk, and if not, we have to move on and do what we have to do as an organization.

"For the most part, the great quarterbacks are in the same system year in and year out, and are developing in that system. [Teams are] not holding our breath every March and April, waiting for the guy. But if that's the case, that's the case. But we like Kirk and his development. He's played well at times, without a doubt, proven that he's a good starting NFL quarterback."

Cousins threw for 4,093 yards and 27 touchdowns against 13 interceptions during the regular season. He saw his numbers markedly decline from his Pro Bowl campaign in 2016, with his QBR dropping more than 16 points. In December, Cousins completed just 56.7 percent of his passes and posted a 75.0 passer rating to complete a 7-9 season on a low note.

"When you're 7-9, you know it's hard to say, 'Wow, this guy really was outstanding,'" Gruden told reporters. "Kirk had his flashes where he was really good. From a consistent standpoint, over the course of 16 games, you know we're 7-9."

The Browns have started 27 different quarterbacks since coming back to the NFL in 1999. DeShone Kizer started 15 games in 2017, posting an NFL-low 60.5 quarterback rating and throwing an NFL-high 22 interceptions.

Where is the "bus?"

If they find a way to get Cousins here....man oh man.

Pay da man, get a RT in FA, and draft straight up weapons with our first two picks.

At that point, I’m perfectly cool with trading back. Auction the #1 overall to he highest bidder, grab Barkley or Fitz #4 overall, and have a field day with the rest of the picks.