Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Official Kirk Cousins - GETS his chance, now what?


pizzatyme

Recommended Posts

He's gonna get paid and he deserves it. And I don't think he'll suddenly work and produce any less, just seems like a hard working young man. I know there have been reports that people say he's such a great student. Starting to think he's once heck of a steal in dynasty, as I bet most owners got him for little to nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, CabinFever said:

He's gonna get paid and he deserves it. And I don't think he'll suddenly work and produce any less, just seems like a hard working young man. I know there have been reports that people say he's such a great student. Starting to think he's once heck of a steal in dynasty, as I bet most owners got him for little to nothing. 

"How do you like me now!"

Funny how things work out. Kirk Cousins is going to land a 100 million dollar deal and Cornball Griffin will probably be out of the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

picked him up off the wire last week after finally being done with bortles to stream while Winston had some tough matchups... now I don't know if I can pull him under any circumstances even with Winston facing the Saints twice in Week 14 and 16.  Saints D looks much better and I think Cousins has just put it all together, he has 5 great options to throw to, he has a line that seems to pass protect, nobody to run and a D that will keep him chucking.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smack Tripper said:

picked him up off the wire last week after finally being done with bortles to stream while Winston had some tough matchups... now I don't know if I can pull him under any circumstances even with Winston facing the Saints twice in Week 14 and 16.  Saints D looks much better and I think Cousins has just put it all together, he has 5 great options to throw to, he has a line that seems to pass protect, nobody to run and a D that will keep him chucking.

I grabbed winston just for those 2 juicy playoff matchups....but if I had Kirk on those teams I dont know how I could sit him....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
25 minutes ago, pizzatyme said:

Shark move for the Skins is to Franchise him, get their picks from 49ers once their sign him, then go give a 1st for Garropolo.

I think if the Skins can sign him for around $20 million a year they will. If he's wanting $25 million a year I think the trade with SF is more likely to happen.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, pizzatyme said:

Shark move for the Skins is to Franchise him, get their picks from 49ers once their sign him, then go give a 1st for Garropolo.

And the shark move for SF would be to stay away this year, try to rebuild the defense with high picks, go 2-14 again in 2017 and hope Darnold lives up to the hype and comes out in the 2018 draft.

Giving up the #2 pick this year and another pick in 2018 for Cousins isn't the answer for SF.  Hope this whole thing is just talk started because Shanahan has worked with Cousins in the past. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, efactor said:

Hope this whole thing is just talk started because Shanahan has worked with Cousins in the past. 

That's where it started, yes. Along with the fact that Shanahan will supposedly have a lot of input into personnel if he takes the 49ers job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fatness said:

That's where it started, yes. Along with the fact that Shanahan will supposedly have a lot of input into personnel if he takes the 49ers job.

 

It could also just be a smart play from Cousins' agent to drive his price to stay up. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sebowski said:

 

It could also just be a smart play from Cousins' agent to drive his price to stay up. 

SF has no GM or coach in place (Shanahan may still find a reason to not take the job), yet they are supposedly going make a strong play for Cousins?  Sounds like a Jed and Parag thing, which I assume the new GM would bring some sanity to if they are talking about multiple 1sts.

Edited by efactor
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, efactor said:

SF has no GM or coach in place (Shanahan may still find a reason to not take the job), yet they are supposedly going make a strong play for Cousins?  Sounds like a Jed and Parag thing, which I assume the new GM would bring some sanity to if they are talking about multiple 1sts.

The new GM they get is going to be a 2nd tier guy at best, because he automatically has to be cool with sharing personnel duties with Shanahan. Hell, Shanahan might even have final say. The 49ers have a HC in place before they have their GM, whoever they bring in is going to be someone who is just happy for the pay raise, the title, and the opportunity and is willing to be pushed around by a 35 year old first time HC...there's a reason all the best candidates withdrew from the process and re-signed with their better, more stable organizations, and its not just working for Jed York. These guys have their pick of jobs every year, the best GM candidates want to come in first, have total control over personnel, and hire their own HC.

Edited by ConnSKINS26
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

The new GM they get is going to be a 2nd tier guy at best, because he automatically has to be cool with sharing personnel duties with Shanahan. Hell, Shanahan might even have final say. The 49ers have a HC in place before they have their GM, whoever they bring in is going to be someone who is just happy for the pay raise, the title, and the opportunity and is willing to be pushed around by a 35 year old first time HC...there's a reason all the best candidates withdrew from the process and re-signed with their better, more stable organizations, and its not just working for Jed York. These guys have their pick of jobs every year, the best GM candidates want to come in first, have total control over personnel, and hire their own HC.

Could very well be the case, but that still doesn't mean that SF will be making a play for Cousins if the Shanahan hire is confirmed and the new GM (even assuming that Shanahan has final say in your scenario) is in place.  Just because Shanahan worked with Cousins doesn't mean he will give two firsts for him.  At least I like to think the new coach isn't that foolish but who knows?

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, efactor said:

Could very well be the case, but that still doesn't mean that SF will be making a play for Cousins if the Shanahan hire is confirmed and the new GM (even assuming that Shanahan has final say in your scenario) is in place.  Just because Shanahan worked with Cousins doesn't mean he will give two firsts for him.  At least I like to think the new coach isn't that foolish but who knows?

Absolutely agree, was just commenting on the part about a GM coming in and being the voice of reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, efactor said:

Could very well be the case, but that still doesn't mean that SF will be making a play for Cousins if the Shanahan hire is confirmed and the new GM (even assuming that Shanahan has final say in your scenario) is in place.  Just because Shanahan worked with Cousins doesn't mean he will give two firsts for him.  At least I like to think the new coach isn't that foolish but who knows?

They may not have to give 2 firsts for him. The Redskins can negotiate what they trade him for if he's signed by the Skins, to a contract the trading partner is OK with. I'm not saying that will happen, since this is all just speculation, just bringing up the possibility. No one knows for sure what McCloughan thinks of Cousins's longterm value, or of Gruden's for that matter; there was a leak of the phrase "stats compiler" from the front office though, I believe. I think the Skins negotiating a longterm deal with Cousins this year will be excruciating, with probably a gap of $4-5 million/year between their respective offers. I don't sense much willingness on either side to bend. Again, this is just my speculation. I think if the Skins were offered the #2 pick this year and a #1 next year they'd be sorely tempted to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interview from either late yesterday or very early today, played on ESPN980 in DC, Al Galdi interviewing Jason Cole who has a source in the front office of the Skins (McCloughan is suspected). Audio

Best summary I could write while listening:

"Redskins will consider trading or not trading Cousins"
Skins see Cousins's season as "positive, generally, not great"
"system may be good enough where with a different QB you can do a little bit better"
"if Kyle goes to SF there's no question they'll make an offer"
Redskins will look at all alternatives to Cousins before deciding to franchise or make longterm offer
"SF and Cleveland both have so much money under the cap"
"Cleveland has so many draft picks"
Browns probably want Cousins or Garoppolo

Edited by fatness
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/7486/kirk-cousins

Speaking Thursday, free agent Kirk Cousins said he would be willing to play under the franchise tag for the second consecutive year in 2017.
 
In other words, Cousins will take $23.94 million if you give it to him. "We will cross that bridge when we come to it, but I would probably do what I did last year," Cousins said at the Pro Bowl. "I will sign it and play with it. I'm not afraid." Cousins would obviously prefer a long-term deal, but the tag would be far from a catastrophic scenario, as it would simply make him much richer while merely delaying an inevitable monster payday. It's in the Redskins' interest to get a deal done this year. Jan 26 - 2:04 PM
Source: ESPN.com
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, squistion said:

:lol:

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/7486/kirk-cousins

Speaking Thursday, free agent Kirk Cousins said he would be willing to play under the franchise tag for the second consecutive year in 2017.
 
In other words, Cousins will take $23.94 million if you give it to him. "We will cross that bridge when we come to it, but I would probably do what I did last year," Cousins said at the Pro Bowl. "I will sign it and play with it. I'm not afraid." Cousins would obviously prefer a long-term deal, but the tag would be far from a catastrophic scenario, as it would simply make him much richer while merely delaying an inevitable monster payday. It's in the Redskins' interest to get a deal done this year. Jan 26 - 2:04 PM
Source: ESPN.com

I love to see a player gambling on himself.   24 million for 2017 and if he plays wells and stays healthy, Washington has to either sign him to a long term contract under his terms or franchise him a third time and increase his salary 44 percent to 36 million (I think I read this right anyway) in 2018, which would be really tough to do under any salary cap.  If they don't, he becomes a FA and there will be a bidding war based on the limited amount of quality QBs in the NFL.

Kind of refreshing to me to see this attitude vs taking the safer route of guaranteed money.  A gamble for sure, but can pay off huge.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, osubuckeyeman said:

Love how Cousins said he would play under the tag and that he is not scared. I think he placed the pressure back on the Redskins. They don't want Colt McCoy being the starting Qb next season. Why in the world would they trade Cousins and then turn around and draft a rookie unproven Qb?

Because they don't feel he is worth what he is demanding? I don't know what that number may be. Maybe no one knows yet. But I think it is pretty obvious that is the answer. If Cousins wants the team to lock up a huge dollar value to keep him, and if the skins feel he isn't worth anywhere near that and don't want to lock up that kind of money on a single payer, what are their choices? Just blindly give in to what he demands?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he gets franchised this year, he'll get even more than 20 mil plus next year.

So he should take less, because no one thinks he's a true franchise QB?

He's a free agent. Not many QBs make it to free agent. That drives the price up. 

He can take 40 mil for two years, then make his own deal. That sounds good, I would be cool with doing that. Why would he settle for less than top dollar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is they want to pay him less then say 23 million a year, however the franchise tag has Cousins at 24 million next season so naturally that's where Cousins thinks the salary talks should start. 

Skins are going to end up paying him what, 48 million over two years of he plays under the franchise tag? 

The local guy Kevin Sheehan has been saying since day one that they should have just signed him long term before the first franchise tag. For one, you may end up paying Cousins 48 (?) million guaranteed (which looks like they may end up doing ) and two, it might feel like you're over paying Cousins at first, but if even if you overplayed a little then, it would've likely been less than the guarantee franchise tag money over the two years and as the salary cap went up, it would feel a bargain contract by this time. 

They gotta #### or get off the pot.

Edited by STEADYMOBBIN 22
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, STEADYMOBBIN 22 said:

The local guy Kevin Sheehan has been saying since day one that they should have just signed him long term before the first franchise tag. For one, you may end up paying Cousins 48 (?) million guaranteed (which looks like they may end up doing ) and two, it might feel like you're over paying Cousins at first, but if even if you overplayed a little then, it would've likely been less than the guarantee franchise tag money over the two years and as the salary cap went up, it would feel a bargain contract by this time. 

Yeah, Sheehan's been saying that but to be fair, Sheehan's been a total cheerleader and apologist for Cousins for a couple years now. After the Green Bay game he was saying Cousins was a top 5 QB in the league, saying that for 2 days nonstop. By the end of the year (after the Redskins' 2-4 finish, including putting up 15 points against Carolina and 10 points against the Giants where Cousins threw the killer INT), Sheehan was swearing he never said Cousins was top 5. And then he went back to saying the Skins should pay Cousins anything he wants.

Cousins is an average-to-good QB on a team that was completely stacked with offensive weapons to help him out. I think he's worth $20 million/yr, and if the team can get him for $22 million/yr I think they'll do it. If Cousins is asking $24-25 million/yr, I don't think a long term deal will get done. The front office knows he can't carry a team like great QB's can, they know he'll have fewer weapons next year (loss of Jackson and/or Garcon, loss of McVay).

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎27‎/‎2017 at 6:37 PM, efactor said:

I love to see a player gambling on himself.   24 million for 2017 and if he plays wells and stays healthy, Washington has to either sign him to a long term contract under his terms or franchise him a third time and increase his salary 44 percent to 36 million (I think I read this right anyway) in 2018, which would be really tough to do under any salary cap.  If they don't, he becomes a FA and there will be a bidding war based on the limited amount of quality QBs in the NFL.

Kind of refreshing to me to see this attitude vs taking the safer route of guaranteed money.  A gamble for sure, but can pay off huge.

 

 

 

 

 

Toughest division in the NFL right now. Every team has a franchise QB. Wouldn't be a bad move to play it out and leave for SF in 2018.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He will be in DC this season.  It's all smoke.  For QBs under 30 years old, he's top 10 in the league.  What's the other option?  Start over.  Sure, that's what gets the other players on the team psyched up - trading a top half of the league QB for unknowns.  Maybe if you get a couple of 1s and some players there's a trade there, but who is giving up that?  Nobody.

This offense works, and it works because of Cousins.  With Jackson likely gone, the only star position player is Reed.  Yet they still put up yards.  It needs better red-zone finishing, and there are ways to fix that.  Like a WR over 6' tall.

Now if they have to franchise him this year, I'm not sure he's back in 2018.  If they like him, they need to get a deal done by June 1.  Becasue if he plays good there will be a HUGE bidding war on him.

My guess, in late May he signs a 5-6 year deal for 23m + per year.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brunell4MVP said:

He will be in DC this season.  It's all smoke.  For QBs under 30 years old, he's top 10 in the league.  What's the other option?  Start over.  Sure, that's what gets the other players on the team psyched up - trading a top half of the league QB for unknowns.  Maybe if you get a couple of 1s and some players there's a trade there, but who is giving up that?  Nobody.

This offense works, and it works because of Cousins.  With Jackson likely gone, the only star position player is Reed.  Yet they still put up yards.  It needs better red-zone finishing, and there are ways to fix that.  Like a WR over 6' tall.

Now if they have to franchise him this year, I'm not sure he's back in 2018.  If they like him, they need to get a deal done by June 1.  Becasue if he plays good there will be a HUGE bidding war on him.

My guess, in late May he signs a 5-6 year deal for 23m + per year.

 

If they franchise him this year it would cost them I believe 44% more to franchise him again next year, which basically makes him un-keepable. Cousins wants to get paid, obviously, and if Washington isn't going to poney up the money someone else will. If you franchise him this year he is probably not coming back and would likely go elsewhere.

I'd trade him if I'm Washington. because I don't see this ending well; I see them eventually having to either over-pay him and they are strapped for years or Cousins says "see ya" and Washington has to start over anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can franchise a guy for 10 million and his market value next year will 4 for 30, he will gladly sign for around 5 for 40, because of the leverage of the franchise tag. Even if he says no, you can threaten to franchise him a second time.

If you franchised him last year for 10 million, and the second year franchise mumber is now 14 million, plus his market value next year will be a little higher, say, 4 for 31, it should now cost you 5 for 45 to lock him up.

But the dynamic has changed, because if he takes the franchise tag, he can never be tagged again. Only two times per player. So now nobody can ever use the tag on him as leverage. Theres value in that. 

So now, a savvy player might say no thanks to 5 for 45, and want 5 for 50.  Even though his market value barely went up, your cost to keep.him went way up.

Which is why it's always better to do the first extension before the first franchise tender is signed, or be willing to lose the player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bostonfred said:

 

But the dynamic has changed, because if he takes the franchise tag, he can never be tagged again. Only two times per player. So now nobody can ever use the tag on him as leverage. Theres value in that. 

I could be wrong, but I believe one team can franchise one player only twice. However I believe a player can be franchised up to a total of three times from multiple teams.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brunell4MVP said:

This offense works, and it works because of Cousins.  With Jackson likely gone, the only star position player is Reed.  Yet they still put up yards.  It needs better red-zone finishing, and there are ways to fix that.  Like a WR over 6' tall.

I'll take issue with the bolded.

What I'd say is "This offense works, outside the red zone, because of Cousins, Jackson, Garcon, Reed, Crowder, an offensive line that only gave up 23 sacks, a pass-happy head coach, and a pass-happy OC."

This coming season Jackson and/or Garcon will be gone, the pass-happy OC will be gone, and the HC will be on a short leash. The offense can be reasonably expected to take a step backward.

The front office was not impressed with the team's 2-4 finish, with the loss to Carolina where they put up 15 points, the loss to the Giants where they put up 10 points and Cousins threw the killer INT. Those things, as well as the inability to turn red zone visits into TD's, fall on Cousins and Gruden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, fatness said:

I'll take issue with the bolded.

What I'd say is "This offense works, outside the red zone, because of Cousins, Jackson, Garcon, Reed, Crowder, an offensive line that only gave up 23 sacks, a pass-happy head coach, and a pass-happy OC."

This coming season Jackson and/or Garcon will be gone, the pass-happy OC will be gone, and the HC will be on a short leash. The offense can be reasonably expected to take a step backward.

The front office was not impressed with the team's 2-4 finish, with the loss to Carolina where they put up 15 points, the loss to the Giants where they put up 10 points and Cousins threw the killer INT. Those things, as well as the inability to turn red zone visits into TD's, fall on Cousins and Gruden.

Not that this will turn out rosy like it did with ATL but last year ATL had one of the easiest schedules and I was referring to Ryan as 'Ice Pick' Ryan because he was bound to stab you in the eye in the redzone with a game killing INT. This year with one of the hardest schedules, it turned around. Your statement is a mirror image of the guys on Falconslife message board as far QB & HC. Had they unloaded Matt Ryan (who has failed again and again over the years), after last years late season meltdown, as some of the homers wanted to do, where would they be? Bottom feeders in the division instead of in the SB.

I'll tell you this though, the Redskins are now in the toughest division in the NFL. ATL is in a currently middle of the road division.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fatness said:

I'll take issue with the bolded.

What I'd say is "This offense works, outside the red zone, because of Cousins, Jackson, Garcon, Reed, Crowder, an offensive line that only gave up 23 sacks, a pass-happy head coach, and a pass-happy OC."

This coming season Jackson and/or Garcon will be gone, the pass-happy OC will be gone, and the HC will be on a short leash. The offense can be reasonably expected to take a step backward.

The front office was not impressed with the team's 2-4 finish, with the loss to Carolina where they put up 15 points, the loss to the Giants where they put up 10 points and Cousins threw the killer INT. Those things, as well as the inability to turn red zone visits into TD's, fall on Cousins and Gruden.

The record, that's on the 3rd worst D in the NFL.  Which is why Barry was gone before the last whistle blew.

If you want to let Cousins go, who's the replacement?  A draft pick?  Any FA signing is a significant downgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CabinFever said:

I hope the Skins do resign Cousins...but equally as bad I hope they upgrade at RB. It did wonders for Dallas and would do wonders for Cousins too, having a balance, and it should help them become more efficient and less predictable in the red zone. 

Oh, I hope they re-sign him to, but at a price that reasonable reflects what he's worth and what he will be worth. I'd be fine with $20 million/yr. At $25 million/year I don't think he's worth it because they need to spend the money elsewhere on the roster. They spent less on defense last year than any team and it showed, as Brunell4MVP mentions. The money was all spent on offense and "weapons" for Cousins, without which his stats wouldn't have been as gaudy.

If they end up settling on $22 million/yr. I can live with that.

As to needing a RB, I agree the run game needs to be much better but that starts with better O-line players and blocking. They need a C and LG for starters, and game plans that keep using the run instead of abandoning it when they're down 10 in the middle of the 2nd quarter. A better RB would be great, but last year Elliott would have struggled to gain 1000 for the Skins even though he's an excellent player. His YPA would have been less and his attempts would have been way down. They need to fix the run blocking and game plans for the running game to work.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, fatness said:

I'll take issue with the bolded.

What I'd say is "This offense works, outside the red zone, because of Cousins, Jackson, Garcon, Reed, Crowder, an offensive line that only gave up 23 sacks, a pass-happy head coach, and a pass-happy OC."

This coming season Jackson and/or Garcon will be gone, the pass-happy OC will be gone, and the HC will be on a short leash. The offense can be reasonably expected to take a step backward.

The front office was not impressed with the team's 2-4 finish, with the loss to Carolina where they put up 15 points, the loss to the Giants where they put up 10 points and Cousins threw the killer INT. Those things, as well as the inability to turn red zone visits into TD's, fall on Cousins and Gruden.

Not sure I can buy into this.  That WR corps is pretty average.  Certainly nothing that's going to prop up a QB on its own.  Reed is good but Cousins' numbers didn't really fall off in the 4 games that Reed missed.  Lastly, I don't think the pass happy thing matters.  It's not like Cousins was just a volume passer.  His efficiency numbers (8.1ypa, 67% completion, 97.6 rtg) are all very good on a per attempt basis.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, fatness said:
1 hour ago, FreeBaGeL said:

Not sure I can buy into this.  That WR corps is pretty average.  Certainly nothing that's going to prop up a QB on its own.  Reed is good but Cousins' numbers didn't really fall off in the 4 games that Reed missed.  Lastly, I don't think the pass happy thing matters.  It's not like Cousins was just a volume passer.  His efficiency numbers (8.1ypa, 67% completion, 97.6 rtg) are all very good on a per attempt basis.

Agree.

The simple question with any QB after a couple of years time is, can you get to a Super Bowl with the player?  If the answer is no, fine, move on.   With Cousins  probably you can (although management may not see it that way).  But IMO 90% of the problems with the Redskins have nothing to do with Cousins.

Don't care if the number is $20m or $25m,   From a career potential perspective he's the best QB this team has had in 40+ years.  You can't let a potential franchise QB walk.  Even if it comes back to bite you.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brunell4MVP said:

 

I agree that you cannot offer him 20 or 22 million.  Someone WILL offer him 24.  You either offer him at least that or just let him go.  Or franchise him for a one year rental only, which doesn't make any sense if you are just going to let him go after the year.

In terms of whether you can win a Super Bowl with him:  one comparison could be Matt Ryan.  There were years he was criticized for not scoring in the red zone and there were years that the Falcons had a worse record than what Cousins has had to date.  I'm not saying that Cousins > Ryan.  Nor am I saying that Ryan > Cousins.  What I am saying is that it's easy to compare Cousins to Aaron Rodgers and say, he's not good enough.  It's another to compare him to Ryan and say, "could he be that good?"  Note that in Ryan's case he has offensive weapons (Julio Jones better than anything the Redskins have), a superior running attack, and an average defense (not a Trent Dilfer situation). 

We got into this in the Redskins thread and I think that there is no point fussing 22 vs. 24.  Yes, you'd rather keep all that money in house but you have to ask yourself...with that extra $2 million, are you upgrading the defense enough to compensate for the drop off in QB from Cousins to McCoy?  Or, you have to ask yourself, if you had a $18 million QB in Osweiler would you be able to upgrade the defense enough with that $6 million savings to compensate for the drop off from Cousins to Osweiller?

Either way, just looking at $24 and saying, "that number is too big," that's just an abstraction.  What PRACTICALLY are your opportunity costs is the question.

Edited by MikeApf
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, MikeApf said:

We got into this in the Redskins thread and I think that there is no point fussing 22 vs. 24.  Yes, you'd rather keep all that money in house but you have to ask yourself...with that extra $2 million, are you upgrading the defense enough to compensate for the drop off in QB from Cousins to McCoy?

Flawed math. It should be "with an extra $22-24 million, are you upgrading the defense enough to compensate for the drop off in QB from Cousins to McCoy." That's not even to mention the draft picks Cousins might net.

Scot McCloughan seems to think the answer is yes and I'll ride with him. Plus Cooley's reports that the players in the locker room would run through a wall for Colt McCoy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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.   Restore formatting

  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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...