And everyone pretty much agrees that the red zone struggles had more to do with the dodgy running game. Iffy points here.
Again, saying the Skins have the tools around the QB to properly execute an NFL-level passing game is kinda pointless. How Cousins performs with the tools we give him is all you can really judge him by, and he's been top-10 these last 2 years. Conjuring dream scenarios about how he'd play with less or on another team or how another guy might perform here might be fun to talk about, but it's all meaningless conjecture at best.
We have the team we have. Cousins plays great with that team. Getting another guy that plays that well or drafting and developing someone to be as good or better? That's a VERY tall order that is pretty much impossible to achieve in short order. You want another indeterminate amount of years of cellar-dwelling football waiting for that to happen, or would you maybe concede that it's worth less than 2.5% of our cap to lock Cousins up now?
No, because they were his first two years. We had 4 years to evaluate him. If he'd escalated from 750 yards to 1,600+, that'd be a different conversation. But the reverse happened, so...
That doesn't happen unless you keep a guy around. If you don't pay him, he'll leave.
Not gonna get to any important games without a quarterback. It's kind of important. None of those guys just magically materialized at the Super Bowl. Sometimes it works out with a young guy (Wilson, Roethlisberger), but most of the time you have to invest in and develop players, and build a winner.
Letting your best players walk isn't the way to do that, especially not at a position that's arguably the most pivotal in sports.
Sure, Cousins didn't win the Giants game, but he's won some tough ones, including a couple as a rookie with everything stacked against him. He's got heart. If you want the Redskins to eventually win something, you have to start building around SOMEONE. If not Cousins, who?
This is actually a good example. The Caps paid Semin big dollars to continue evaluating him. It cost a lot to make that call, and it took 7 seasons over parts of 9 calendar years.
We can do that with Cousins if you want. He's played for us for 5 seasons now and has not only gotten progressively better each year, but that progression has culminated in top-10 status in back-to-back years. You can guarantee yourself another year of evaluation at 24m if you want. You can even tag him again if you wanna pay him 34.5m the following year.
Cousins reportedly wanted 20m last year, and the offer apparently topped out at 16m. Now that's going to cost us. We'd be lucky to pay him 20m now.
It's not always stupid to wait, and hindsight can be painful sometimes, but this is what continued evaluation costs. It cost us 22 million dollars over 4 seasons to evaluate Semin, and Carolina spent another huge chunk making up their minds. Turned out we made the right call, but it was anything but cheap.
So what's your threshold for paying Cousins? To fold your arms over a $4m disparity, let him walk, and start all over with a rookie? Another expensive year on the tag with maybe one less big-time receiver and still no running game? If Cousins still performs, what'll he cost then? How many times will it take to convince you? Did you really expect him to do more with a dodgy running game and no D? Won't you just continue to use these same excuses if he maintains performance and holds out next year?
The world ain't perfect, Rid. If you're waiting for a QB to deliver long-term performance and Super Bowls BEFORE you pay him, you'll be waiting forever.
The "we can't build a winner if we pay him so much" argument is bogus. Again, the disparity is MAYBE 4m annually. That won't decimate the rest of our team.
Alone? He's thrown for a solid amount of TDs these last two years, and his overall performance ranks pretty damn high. Again, the longer this debate goes on, the more you embrace bad comparisons and hyperbole. Your argument is getting LESS convincing. That's not how it's supposed to go.
