Jump to content
Rotoworld.com Forums

Kirk Cousins 2017 Outlook


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 603
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

10 minutes ago, devaster said:

Well I looked it up and PFF did rank Washington #7. They didn't look like #7 in the games I watched though. Maybe they ranked very high in pass blocking, even with the injuries and suspensions, but the run blocking was probably closer to middle of the pack or the in 20 range.

 

FWIW Football Outsiders, a stat driven site as opposed to PFFs visual grades, had Washington as the #5 run blocking line in all of football.

 

The running backs made the line look a lot worse than it really was.

 

My personal opinion was that they were more in the range of 10ish as a run blocking line but two different independent methodologies are both saying they were better than that.   Hell, I thought Long was the weak link on the line and they gave him a decent grade.

 

Injuries and suspension did put the line in flux but the replacement LT played excellent football.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 96mnc said:

 

FWIW Football Outsiders, a stat driven site as opposed to PFFs visual grades, had Washington as the #5 run blocking line in all of football.

 

The running backs made the line look a lot worse than it really was.

 

My personal opinion was that they were more in the range of 10ish as a run blocking line but two different independent methodologies are both saying they were better than that.   Hell, I thought Long was the weak link on the line and they gave him a decent grade.

 

Injuries and suspension did put the line in flux but the replacement LT played excellent football.

 

Hell of an O-line division when you consider Philly also has a top 10 line (at least per PFF, and that's with Johnson out for a big chunk of the year).  New York is the only one dragging it down, but even they were 20th (slighly below average).  No other division has more than 1 team in PFF's top 10 O-lines.  The NFC East had 3. 

 

ETA:  My bad.  AFC North had 2 (Steelers and Ravens). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jbshaw said:

Hell of an O-line division when you consider Philly also has a top 10 line (at least per PFF, and that's with Johnson out for a big chunk of the year).  New York is the only one dragging it down, but even they were 20th (slighly below average).  No other division has more than 1 team in PFF's top 10 O-lines.  The NFC East had 3. 

 

ETA:  My bad.  AFC North had 2 (Steelers and Ravens). 

 

Very interesting. Makes the Giants' run defense all the more impressive considering they have 6 games/yr against the best OLs in the league. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jbshaw said:

Hell of an O-line division when you consider Philly also has a top 10 line (at least per PFF, and that's with Johnson out for a big chunk of the year).  New York is the only one dragging it down, but even they were 20th (slighly below average).  No other division has more than 1 team in PFF's top 10 O-lines.  The NFC East had 3. 

 

ETA:  My bad.  AFC North had 2 (Steelers and Ravens). 

Philly is going to lose Jason Peters sooner rather than later due to his age and nagging injuries. Still a solid line when Lane Johnson isn't suspended for large stretches though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, devaster said:

Philly is going to lose Jason Peters sooner rather than later due to his age and nagging injuries. Still a solid line when Lane Johnson isn't suspended for large stretches though.

 

They are reportedly asking Peters to take a paycut right now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 96mnc said:

 

FWIW Football Outsiders, a stat driven site as opposed to PFFs visual grades, had Washington as the #5 run blocking line in all of football.

 

The running backs made the line look a lot worse than it really was.

 

My personal opinion was that they were more in the range of 10ish as a run blocking line but two different independent methodologies are both saying they were better than that.   Hell, I thought Long was the weak link on the line and they gave him a decent grade.

 

Injuries and suspension did put the line in flux but the replacement LT played excellent football.

 

 

Weird. Maybe the RBs were that bad. Watching Matt Jones running was evident that most of his yards were before contact and he went down like a sack of potatoes on the first hit. Some of those first hits being fumbles. I thought Kelley looked alright. I think they have a diamond in the rough in Mack Brown though, but he wasn't able to climb the depth chart to starter. I think Washington is set at RB even if they don't add a prospect in next year's draft.

 

How well does Kelley or Brown do in pass protection though? Because Thompson is a revolving door in pass pro. That could be a concern for Cousins and that offense if they don't have a RB that can reliably pass protect.

 

The receiving options outside of Reed leave a lot to be desired though. And almost everyone in that receiving corps feels like an injury waiting to happen. A bunch of them have a tough time staying on the field consistently. Reed is awesome, but I don't think he is long for the league.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, devaster said:

 

Weird. Maybe the RBs were that bad. Watching Matt Jones running was evident that most of his yards were before contact and he went down like a sack of potatoes on the first hit. Some of those first hits being fumbles. I thought Kelley looked alright. I think they have a diamond in the rough in Mack Brown though, but he wasn't able to climb the depth chart to starter. I think Washington is set at RB even if they don't add a prospect in next year's draft.

 

How well does Kelley or Brown do in pass protection though? Because Thompson is a revolving door in pass pro. That could be a concern for Cousins and that offense if they don't have a RB that can reliably pass protect.

 

The receiving options outside of Reed leave a lot to be desired though. And almost everyone in that receiving corps feels like an injury waiting to happen. A bunch of them have a tough time staying on the field consistently. Reed is awesome, but I don't think he is long for the league.

 

Two wrs are free agents and may be gone in djax and Garcon.  The guy who profiles as a true alpha #1 wr, Doctson, can't get on the field.  Reed is possibly one major concussion away from having to hang it up.  Crowder is great as a slot but that's all he is, a slot.  They are going to need to bring in more wr talent.

 

RB - Jones lacks vision among other things.   He missed holes too often.  Kelley has vision but is a poor athlete.  Can't comment on their pass pro.  I do know that blitz pressure affected Cousins way too often.  That's on the line,  the backs, and Cousins.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, joshua18 said:

 

Very interesting. Makes the Giants' run defense all the more impressive considering they have 6 games/yr against the best OLs in the league. 

Only the Cowboys have a great RB paired with it of course.  Washington has decent, and the Eagles have some girl scouts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess it's not all that bad...
 

Pro Football Talk's Mike Florio reports Kirk Cousins will not sign a long-term deal prior to the March 1 deadline for the Redskins to apply the franchise tag.

With a third tag not a functional option, Cousins has all the leverage in the negotiations over a long-term deal, and it looks like he is going to use it. Once the Redskins apply the tag, which they almost certainly will, Cousins can ask for at the very least the value of the tag ($23.94 million) paid out in 2017 and a raise on that total guaranteed in 2018. If Washington balks at that price, Cousins can play out another one-year tender and test the open market next spring, which reports suggest is his preferred option anyway. It is far from a given the Redskins lock up Cousins to a long-term deal.
Edited by elite
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, elite said:

Guess it's not all that bad...
 

Pro Football Talk's Mike Florio reports Kirk Cousins will not sign a long-term deal prior to the March 1 deadline for the Redskins to apply the franchise tag.

With a third tag not a functional option, Cousins has all the leverage in the negotiations over a long-term deal, and it looks like he is going to use it. Once the Redskins apply the tag, which they almost certainly will, Cousins can ask for at the very least the value of the tag ($23.94 million) paid out in 2017 and a raise on that total guaranteed in 2018. If Washington balks at that price, Cousins can play out another one-year tender and test the open market next spring, which reports suggest is his preferred option anyway. It is far from a given the Redskins lock up Cousins to a long-term deal.

 

It's not bad at all. WAS has had the previous 2 offseasons to sign him to a long term deal and balked. Now it's his turn to balk on them. 

 

They arrogantly believed that there would never be a great market for him, but now that his former OCs are HCs in SF and the Rams, he has an unbelievable amount of leverage. 

 

Some reports are that if Goff isn't good, the Rams will pursue Cousins after this season. He has zero incentive to sign a long-term deal unless WAS blows him away with an offer, which won't happen.  He'll play under the franchise tag, and then this time a year from now he'll have even more leverage if his production is anywhere close to what it's been since he became the starter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, joshua18 said:

 

It's not bad at all. WAS has had the previous 2 offseasons to sign him to a long term deal and balked. Now it's his turn to balk on them. 

 

They arrogantly believed that there would never be a great market for him, but now that his former OCs are HCs in SF and the Rams, he has an unbelievable amount of leverage. 

 

Some reports are that if Goff isn't good, the Rams will pursue Cousins after this season. He has zero incentive to sign a long-term deal unless WAS blows him away with an offer, which won't happen.  He'll play under the franchise tag, and then this time a year from now he'll have even more leverage if his production is anywhere close to what it's been since he became the starter. 

 

Yep.

 

He better hope that Doctson gets healthy though and Washington adds another WR to the stable because otherwise he's just throwing to Crowder and Reed.  Not good...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not buying that trade but these guys are morons. They are going to lose Cousins and like you said, set themselves back years. Unprecedented level of FO stupidity. A franchise QB, let go AFTER paying him franchise $. Whether they trade him or not, they are easily at the top of dumbest FOs in the NFL. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's official:

 

Redskins assigned the exclusive-rights franchise tag to QB Kirk Cousins.

The exclusive tag guarantees Cousins a 20-percent raise on his 2016 salary of $19.953 million and prohibits other teams from negotiating with him. He's now scheduled to make $23.94 million in 2017. The Redskins could still theoretically trade Cousins, but negotiations would have to go through Washington's front office and not Cousins' agents. Cousins has flourished in Jay Gruden's offense, improving immensely as a decision maker and precision passer. He has completed at least 67 percent of his throws in consecutive years, posting a 54:23 TD-to-INT ratio during that span. Cousins turns 29 in August. It remains unclear whether the Redskins have interest in signing Cousins to a long-term deal.
 

---

 

NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reports the Redskins have decided they will not trade franchise player Kirk Cousins.

"He is not going anywhere," said RapSheet. "They decided that they are not going to trade him to the 49ers." The Redskins giving off the impression that they won't deal Cousins increases their leverage, but Rapoport seems convinced Cousins is indeed off the trade block. If so, the 49ers may have to turn to a band-aid veteran like Brian Hoyer or Matt Schaub. The free agent signal-caller market is all but barren, and no respected draft analysts believe any quarterback in this year's class is worthy of the No. 2 overall pick.
Edited by elite
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't understand Washington's insanity here. They lucked into Cousins as a fourth round pick just a year after they bet the farm on RG3. That RG3 trade *should* have been a debacle that kept the Skins uncompetitive for a decade, but they stumbled onto a franchise quarterback anyway.  And they've spent the last two years denying it and treating Cousins like hot garbage.  I can't remember seeing a top-10 QB talent receiving this level of disrespect, and it's even more shocking considering both the lack of pro-ready QBs coming out of recent drafts, and the advancing age of so many top-tier QBs.  The Pats, Saints, Cards, Giants, Chargers and Steelers are all going to be looking to the future soon (to say nothing of half the league, who don't even have a quarterback of the present), and the Skins are throwing away a guy they could have locked up for a very reasonable price.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't go as far to say Cousins is a franchise QB. But in the right system, which he is in, he is more than capable of leading his team to the playoffs. He is a solid NFL QB in the right system.

 

I don't really see an issue with tagging Cousins. In the end it costs Washington more money. It is up to Washington to sign Cousins long-term. It is a bit baffling though. They won't get anything for Cousins after this season if they don't sign him long-term.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, eg4190 said:

I just don't understand Washington's insanity here. They lucked into Cousins as a fourth round pick just a year after they bet the farm on RG3. 

 

Cousins was in the same draft as RG3.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, eg4190 said:

I just don't understand Washington's insanity here. They lucked into Cousins as a fourth round pick just a year after they bet the farm on RG3. That RG3 trade *should* have been a debacle that kept the Skins uncompetitive for a decade, but they stumbled onto a franchise quarterback anyway.  And they've spent the last two years denying it and treating Cousins like hot garbage.  I can't remember seeing a top-10 QB talent receiving this level of disrespect, and it's even more shocking considering both the lack of pro-ready QBs coming out of recent drafts, and the advancing age of so many top-tier QBs.  The Pats, Saints, Cards, Giants, Chargers and Steelers are all going to be looking to the future soon (to say nothing of half the league, who don't even have a quarterback of the present), and the Skins are throwing away a guy they could have locked up for a very reasonable price.

 

Is he a top 10 QB talent? If I put a list together ranking my top QBs he'd probably fall outside the top 10, although probably close. I think that's really the problem. They don't want to pay him huge money because they don't think he's an elite talent, which he might not be, but he's great in their system and they have no other options. It's going to end real bad for the Skins if he leaves so they just need to pay the man.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, 96mnc said:

 

Cousins was in the same draft as RG3.

 

You are correct, I was confused because we didn't really see much of Cousins until 2013.  But still, the Skins should be counting their lucky stars that a guy they drafted as a backup / insurance policy for RG3 wound up being so much better than RG3.  Instead they've been wishy-washy the whole time, never fully sold on him as "the guy."  I think there's a QB apocalypse looming in the next few years due to generational turnover, and despite Cousins' flaws, locking him into a five-year deal would have been the best move for the team.  Now if he bolts to the 49ers or another QB-needy team next year, they're going to be right back where they were in 2012.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, owenmills said:

 

Is he a top 10 QB talent? If I put a list together ranking my top QBs he'd probably fall outside the top 10, although probably close. I think that's really the problem. They don't want to pay him huge money because they don't think he's an elite talent, which he might not be, but he's great in their system and they have no other options. It's going to end real bad for the Skins if he leaves so they just need to pay the man.

 

I agree, off the top of my head he's right on the edge of top 10 talents but that's before taking things like age into consideration.  Who'd you rather have for the next five years,  Cousins or Brady/Brees/Big Ben?  

 

15m is baseline minimum for any starting QB in their second contract (Brock/Glennon/Tyrod).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you people act like Kirk Cousins is Jesus.  Did we all forget that he stunk in the game against the Giants at home to make the playoffs?  We finished 8-7-1, 9-7 the year before.  He's an above average to good QB.  He had the tools around him to succeed and was okay.  If he loses Jackson and Garcon, I see his stats going down by a fair margin.    

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's weird.

 

I hear people say: "Oh, it's so hard to find quarterbacks. Quarterbacks are such a scarce commodity."

 

Yet here's Kirk f'ing Cousins dropping a 101.6 QB rating in 2015 and following it up with a 97.2 rating in 2016.

 

So which one is it?

 

Edited by My Dinner With Andre
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, verycoolnin said:

Some of you people act like Kirk Cousins is Jesus.  Did we all forget that he stunk in the game against the Giants at home to make the playoffs?  We finished 8-7-1, 9-7 the year before.  He's an above average to good QB.  He had the tools around him to succeed and was okay.  If he loses Jackson and Garcon, I see his stats going down by a fair margin.    

Allow me to introduce you to.......
Josh Doctson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...