Kirk Cousins Development Tracker

Come on folks, you can acquire a good qb if you have the right front office.

Look at the contenders. Palmer was acquired by Arizona from Oakland for a #4 draft pick.

Wilson was a #3 pick. Brady was a #6.

The Packers got Rodgers at #24, after more than half the league passed on him.

The Broncos were contenders from 2012-15 because they signed Manning as a free agent for no draft pick compensation.

Ditto for Drew Brees in New Orleans.

Yes, Cam Newton is playing well as a former #1 overall and Eli was a top 3 pick.

But again most teams even the SB winners don't have top 5 picks starting at qb.

There is no reason to believe if Cousins were to leave that we could not find a Roethlisberger, Bridgewater in the middle to late teens of the first round or even later.
 
If we lose out on Cousins, I don't mind going with RGIII (on the one year deal), Colt McCoy & drafting Carson Wentz (if he's available... hopefully in the 2nd round). I have a feeling we probably let both Cousins & RGIII walk, but Cousins looks like he might be more expensive next year than RGIII. It's a lot of risk for either of them to be here, because if you pay one and the other looks good in another uniform, you are going to have a tough time explaining this to Daniel Snyder (especially if RGIII looks good). It's probably safest to just let them both walk & reset the position on the grounds that you think neither of them will be the future of the team.
 
Smoot Point said:
If we lose out on Cousins, I don't mind going with RGIII (on the one year deal), Colt McCoy & drafting Carson Wentz (if he's available... hopefully in the 2nd round). I have a feeling we probably let both Cousins & RGIII walk, but Cousins looks like he might be more expensive next year than RGIII. It's a lot of risk for either of them to be here, because if you pay one and the other looks good in another uniform, you are going to have a tough time explaining this to Daniel Snyder (especially if RGIII looks good). It's probably safest to just let them both walk & reset the position on the grounds that you think neither of them will be the future of the team.
Click to expand...

If they don't retain Cousins, the best bet is to find a stop gap veteran QB and draft a replacement. Griffin isn't a stop gap. Maybe McCoy is. But I'm thinking a proven winner. Then you let the new guy sit and learn while the old guy plays out his contract.

I'm pretty sure they will keep Cousins for a few more years. His play overall has been better than it has been worse. I think they keep Cousins and work on fixing the rest of the team.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Kel Varnsen said:
I'm pretty sure they will keep Cousins for a few more years. His play overall has been better than it has been worse. I think they keep Cousins and work on fixing the rest of the team.
Click to expand...

Generally, I think you might be right. I'm just not sure Cousins will be affordable enough to be just a stop-gap, and I really think they need to find a franchise quarterback they can build a team around. If we build a team around Cousins, I think we'll be disappointed. Cousins is a good quarterback, but more like a really good backup and a spot-starter. If we're paying him like a starter, we'll have fewer resources to build a team around him that he needs to be successful. However, if you look to develop another rookie to be the franchise guy, you can pay someone like Colt McCoy or Josh McCown journeyman QB numbers as a stop-gap and have the money to develop a team around the rookie.

IMO, you only pay Cousins this offseason if you want him to be the guy going forward... I just don't think he's worth that money.
 
Smoot Point said:
Generally, I think you might be right. I'm just not sure Cousins will be affordable enough to be just a stop-gap, and I really think they need to find a franchise quarterback they can build a team around. If we build a team around Cousins, I think we'll be disappointed. Cousins is a good quarterback, but more like a really good backup and a spot-starter. If we're paying him like a starter, we'll have fewer resources to build a team around him that he needs to be successful. However, if you look to develop another rookie to be the franchise guy, you can pay someone like Colt McCoy or Josh McCown journeyman QB numbers as a stop-gap and have the money to develop a team around the rookie.

IMO, you only pay Cousins this offseason if you want him to be the guy going forward... I just don't think he's worth that money.
Click to expand...

not totally sure yet. gonna give it a few more games against good defenses. but leaning toward your view. I don't think he has the arm strength to be honest. he's more in the alex smith manage the game mold. agree with on the money commitment. he has enough positives and negatives that...at this point...I don't see his value being bid up to unreasonable levels. unless he plays lights out...I'd let him test the market.
 
Bulldog's Twin said:
There is no reason to believe if Cousins were to leave that we could not find a Roethlisberger, Bridgewater in the middle to late teens of the first round or even later.
Click to expand...

Smoot Point said:
I really think they need to find a franchise quarterback they can build a team around.
Click to expand...

But how long have we been saying these 2 things ?

"We can find a gem QB in the mid-to-late rounds"
or
"We need to hold out for our franchise QB to drop out of the sky"

We've been saying that for decades.
For some reason, that's a WHOLE lot easier said than done, for this particular team.
Forget all of that.
We need to hold onto the first truly decent QB we've stumbled upon in a long, long time - lest something worse come upon us, if we let him walk.
Slightly overpay him, if necessary. The alternative, could be a major setback, with yet another worse draft choice at QB.
The question is not, "What is the Cardinals', Packers', Saints', Patriots' history of drafting mid-late round QB's", but "What is the REDSKINS' history of drafting mid-late round QB's" ......and ask yourself, how confident does THAT make you feel ?
Go, Gibran Hamdan !!!
Go, Jordan Palmer !!!
 
Last edited:
Fear The Spear said:
Forget all of that.
We need to hold onto the first truly decent QB we've stumbled upon in a long, long time - lest something worse come upon us, if we let him walk.
Slightly overpay him, if necessary.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to be snarky, but to whom are you referring?
 
Ah. I guess I'm not ready to call Cousins 'the first truly decent QB we've stumbled upon in a long, long time.'

That seems like an awfully generous designation for a guy that has led this team to a four wins in ten starts behind the 20th ranked passing game. He's coming along, but I wouldn't exactly consider the kid indispensable yet.
 
To be fair, he's played two undefeated teams, perhaps the best teams in each conference, in the last 3 weeks.
No other QB in the league has been able to beat those 2 teams.
Also, he should be judged by his intangibles, and not just his won-loss pctg.
And definitely improving. Why cut the cord on a guy who is constantly improving ? Because no-one can definitively say what his talent cap is yet.
 
Jones turns the ball over and he is benched...that fumble got him removed from the game.

Do we even consider doing that with Kirk when he throws interceptions off his back foot 2 feet over a WR head?
 
MikeSr619 said:
Jones turns the ball over and he is benched...that fumble got him removed from the game.

Do we even consider doing that with Kirk when he throws interceptions off his back foot 2 feet over a WR head?
Click to expand...

You know well enough RB's and QB's are not treated the same. Running backs are far more disposable than QB's. It was a bad throw. Shouldn't have happened, but it wasn't benching worthy.
 
stevenaa said:
You know well enough RB's and QB's are not treated the same. Running backs are far more disposable than QB's. It was a bad throw. Shouldn't have happened, but it wasn't benching worthy.
Click to expand...

which one? he has 10 to choose from. He also has only 1 less fumble than Jones. So, while they may be treated differently he has 9 more turnovers than the running back who was just benched.
 
MikeSr619 said:
which one? he has 10 to choose from. He also has only 1 less fumble than Jones. So, while they may be treated differently he has 9 more turnovers than the running back who was just benched.
Click to expand...

So what. I'm not excusing that. But it doesn't get the QB benched. Just not the way it works.
 
MikeSr619 said:
Jones turns the ball over and he is benched...that fumble got him removed from the game.

Do we even consider doing that with Kirk when he throws interceptions off his back foot 2 feet over a WR head?
Click to expand...

I would. but the tether between Gruden/Cousins futures drives that scenario to the extreme end of the probability curve.

absolute numbers, if I may humbly submit, aren't as relevant as impact. either way I agree with your core notion vis accountability.
 
You guys can make up excuses all you want...but when a QB is a turnover machine you look to someone else regardless of bias.

Unless of course you just want to stick with the guy you like and not worry about winning games.
 
stevenaa said:
So what. I'm not excusing that. But it doesn't get the QB benched. Just not the way it works.
Click to expand...

So what? Yeah, it does get them benched. It happens all the time when a QB fails. That is exactly how it works.
 
Not one you're trying to develop. Who is out there learning through adversity. Hopefully. This not a playoff contender no matter how poor the division is. This isn't about winning games, ultimately. He gets his year to sink or swim. Pulling him would make no sense unless you decide you're done with him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 3, Members: 0, Guests: 3)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top