Skip to content

Will Kirk Cousins’ new contract be a cap killer for the Redskins?

Feb 5, 2016, 12:17 PM EDT


Redskins president Bruce Allen said last night that the team has started to have contract discussions with Kirk Cousins’ agent, Mike McCartney, and they are going well.

We feel good,” Allen said. “Kirk wants to be a Washington Redskin, and we want Kirk to be a Washington Redskin. It will work itself out.”

But what will the Redskins’ salary cap look like when it does work itself out? Will the Redskins be able to retain their own good players and pay free agents to fill holes?

In the short term, certainly, his contract should not be an issue. If the Redskins want to they can squeeze Cousins’ deal into a very tight 2016 salary cap spot.

Cousins’ contract is likely to average between $15 and $20 million per year, probably close to the higher figure than the lower. The contract the Chiefs gave Alex Smith in 2014 averages $17 million per year, perhaps a bit less than Cousins will get, but close enough to use it to illustrate how Cousins’ deal could be structured.

Smith’s 2014 salary was $1 million but he still got plenty of cash in the form is an $18 million signing bonus. That structure made the first-year cap hit on his deal $4.6 million.

The Chiefs pay for that bargain cap hit as the years go by. The cap hit jumped up to $15.6 million last year, $17.8 million this coming season, $16.9 million in 2017 and $20.6 million in 2018.

The Redskins may want to smooth out the cap charge increases for Cousins’ contract. Since Bruce Allen has been involved in contract negotiations the organization generally has taken more of a “pay now” approach when it comes to big contracts. They could easily craft a contract for Cousins with a cap hit of $10 million in 2016.

How will that set up the Redskins’ salary cap for 2016? Based on the league estimate of $153 million per team, they currently have about $12.3 million in cap space (cap data via When Robert Griffin III is released prior to the start of the league year on March 9 that number will jump to $26.4 million. They would have opportunities to create more by releasing some veterans but even at that they could comfortably carve out the $10 million for their quarterback.

Cousins’ cap numbers would go up from year to year. Let’s say his deal is for four years and $72 million, an average of $18 million. After that first-year cap hit of $10 million the cap hits could go $17 million in 2017 and then $19 million and $21 million. The remaining $5 million could go into a dummy fifth year that is voidable and would create a dead cap charge in 2020.

Keep in mind that the salary cap is likely to continue to increase annually. It’s going to increase about $10 million from 2015 to this year and the NFLPA anticipates similar jumps. That means that Cousins’ cap will remain roughly the same in terms of the percentage of the cap it eats up.

Still, other players like Trent Williams and Ryan Kerrigan will have increasing cap numbers as well and it will take some careful cap management to work around Cousins’ contract. The key will be Scot McCloughan’s ability to continue to stock the team with quality draft picks who can help the team win while drawing relatively modest salaries.

It’s a lot of money but it’s the going rate. A contract with an average of $18 million would make Cousins the 12th-highest paid quarterback in the NFL. That may be a bit high for a quarterback who has started just one season and doesn’t have a playoff win on his resume. But keep in mind that the cap will go up and quarterbacks signing new contracts will surpass the value of Cousins’ deal.

  1. Mr.moneylover - Feb 5, 2016 at 12:46 PM

    Bruce Allen also was soooooo wrong by saying they gonna release rg3 to the media before they sent out a press release and its a official… Scot m. Dodge the question to have leverage in contract talks but now they don’t have that nomore because kirk cousins agent now know it will be just BS if kirk cousins decide to hold out for more money thanks Bruce Allen you f–kn the redskins organization some more like you did last year…Bruce Allen needs to go…you don’t never give the media any idea you gonna release a guy until its official patriots don’t do it Denver don’t do it Seattle don’t do it so why redskins got this clown giving the media what they want…I think Bruce Allen like the media attention I think if you put a mic in front of his face he will talk for hours he’s like another jerry Jones something we don’t need…rg3 release shouldn’t even be talk about until march 7th and for him to kick the man while he’s down was class less and uncalled for… Its OK to give a update on kirk cousins contract but nobody should know if the organization gonna release a person before it actually happen

    • bangkokben - Feb 5, 2016 at 1:06 PM

      C’mon man! Everybody knows that Griff is gone whether he say it or not. Having said that, I wish Bruce would’ve done like Scot M and dodge the question. Scot did a great job of answering the questions by NOT answering the questions. Bruce, not so much.

    • Mr.moneylover - Feb 5, 2016 at 1:11 PM

      But its still not right…even scot m. Said its not right to say or give hints you gonna release a player before its official

      • bangkokben - Feb 5, 2016 at 1:23 PM

        I agree with you about it not being right; i don’t agree with you on regards to it hurting the team in leverage..

        • Mr.moneylover - Feb 5, 2016 at 3:33 PM

          It was leverage…scot m. Said we want Kirk cousins back we want him to be a franchise QB but I want never over pay a players…keep rg3 was leverage that’s why he never is on the record saying rg3 gonna get cut or the team was thinking about cutting him…kirk cousins agent now can ask for the big bucks because he now know keeping rg3 is a bluff because Bruce Allen came out opening his mouth now they might have to give kirk cousins a stupid contract with a lot of money with no goals in it and it will hurt the franchise for years but if its up to scot m. He not gonna let that happen he will let kirk cousins walk before he give kirk cousins a crazy amount

        • Rich Tandler - Feb 5, 2016 at 3:45 PM

          Bruce deserves to be criticized for plenty but not this. The team can’t lose leverage when it has none. Griffin is going to get cut, period, end of story. The sooner everyone gets used to that the better.

        • bangkokben - Feb 5, 2016 at 3:51 PM

          Nobody but you and few other ‘skins fans thought Griff could possibly be in B&G next year or that that would amount to leverage. Kirk’s agent was going to ask for the max no matter what. Scot and Bruce are going to give him a fair contract that allows for an out after two seasons. It will average between $15M and $20M a year but will not count more against the cap THIS year than the franchise tag but will likely have more guaranteed money than the tag.

    • therealistcat - Feb 6, 2016 at 11:08 AM

      Rich, I whole heartedly agree with money on several levels; but I digress. To here you say Robert is going to be cut and basically get over it is quit disturbing to me. First off, it tells me that even those who report on this team don’t always get football and the nuances of the game. Now before you write me off as a delusional fan, please help me understand? What is it about Kirks resume that says he should receive a long term contract worth 18-20 mil a year? What intangibles did he display that says he is a franchise qb? Not stats, I mean Aaron Rogers type of stuff at the line of scrimmage; off schedule playmaking, good decision making abilities, etc. Opposite of that bone head move he pulled by taking a knee just before the half versus spiking the ball. What did he actually do outside of the marvelous play calling by his coaches and playing making abilities of, namely Jordan Reed? What did he actually do outside of the script that he was given by his coach who clearly had an agenda to make him look good this year Rich? Where was the consistency in play, particularly against above average defenses? This organization should have been patient with Griffin, just as the Panthers did Cam Newton, who had a horrible 2nd and 3rd season in the league. Not to mention he too suffered from injuries. A class organization does that for their talent; especially young talent. The sooner you get with that the better!

      • John - Feb 6, 2016 at 4:23 PM

        Regarding Kirk, this was his first year as “the starter”, not for just a few games by the full season.

        This year he got comfortable running things in the system. As he plays more, things will become second nature and he will be able to act without thinking things through. As a consequence, he’ll be more comfortable “going off schedule”. He grew quite a bit during the course of the season.

        Regarding the not beating good teams, New England and Carolina are head and shoulders above the Redskins. The Redskins defense looked incapable against those teams and the Jets and fell off after the first quarter against the Packers. They beat a bunch of bad teams but then if you sucked last year, you get to play a bunch of teams that also sucked. Its all part of the NFLs parity scheduling system to keep everyone in the hunt as long as possible to generate those TV revenues. You play the hand your dealt.

        In terms of Kirk and the contract, he’s going to get paid. They’ll give him a good chunk guaranteed this year and spread it out over the remaining years. It is what it is.perform and you get paid, especially in contract years.

        Robert was good in 2012. Question is, what has he done since then? He is not a pocket passer. He refuses to be the athlete to make the pistol/read option work. He has demonstrated a penchant for injuries and does not read defenses. They are not going to coddle him forever. Its just time to move on.

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 7, 2016 at 8:54 AM

          “Robert was good in 2012. Question is, what has he done since then? He is not a pocket passer. ”

          Look, I don’t want to get into another RG3 debate. However, the banter of unjust pretenses deriding RG3 continue from some of you here. You are just not being fair about RG3 when you just ask, what has he done since 2012?

          We all know the severe injury he had to returned from we ahead of schedule. This forced him to play with a bulky brace for 2013. Until Cousins wears a bulky brace and shines on the field QUITE ignoring that significant fact. This not only detoured his development but significantly changed how he was going to have to play that season. Maybe if common sense prevailed between the organization and RG3 then he’d have worked that off season on the bench to get his leg fully healthy. Now this longer recovery timetable suggestion and playing without the brace has little do with running as much as it has to do with getting more mobility in the pocket, being able to provide a proper stance, panting, and throwing motion. All those actions are impacted by a bulky brace.

          Also, you never know much about RG3 or the game itself when you say he is not a pocket passer. He was a more efficient pocket passer than Andrew Luck in College. He was an extremely efficient pocket passer in 2012. Yes, he threw in the pocket back then. Just because you play in a pistol formation and sprinkle in some read option doesn’t mean he did work in a pocket. Did he need improve with more development in the pocket? Yes.

          RG3’s biggest issues appeared to be more about his pre snap reads both on pressure and coverage along with trouble reading through progressions. The one area RG3 rarely worked on in College including 2012 was 3rd and forth reads against the coverage. You can see he took to long to scan the whole field before releasing the ball. That’s not an inability it’s a lack of development that was needed.

          2014 Gruden was a horrendous coach unprepared and poorly managed ALL his quarterbacks. No QB including Cousins did well working in Gruden’s system in 2014. 2015, really? RG3 was never given a fair opportunity.

      • John - Feb 6, 2016 at 5:35 PM

        Regarding Cam’s injuries he was not out for significant time and was able to play through the pain. Robert is not built to take a beating. He’s all ready blown a knee in college and the pros. He has also had several concussions. You’d think for the amount of time unable to play, he’d put in time studying film, learning how to read defenses, etc. Not the case.

  2. James McFullan - Feb 5, 2016 at 12:48 PM

    Restructure Dashon Goldson’s, DHall’s, Lichtensteiger’s, Garçon’s, and DJax’s contract and cut Perry Riley, RGIII, Hatcher, and Andre Roberts. Redskins would have plenty of money to resign players and sign free agents.

    • babyteal1 - Feb 5, 2016 at 1:29 PM

      I would be happy with that!!

  3. bangkokben - Feb 5, 2016 at 1:23 PM

    Good work, Rich. Bottom line, there are plenty of ways of giving Cousins market value without hurting the cap this year or in the future. I’d rather Cousins be paid around 16th or $16M a year even as contracts go up and guys like Luck jump into the top tier. There are a number of old dogs (Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer, Drew Brees, and Tony Romo – to name a few) whose days are numbered as well as a few guys that are perhaps under preforming their contracts and may be cap cuts within the next couple of calendar years (Colin Kaepernick, Ryan Tannehill, and Jay Cutler as possibilities). That would have Cousins within the top ten for the bulk of the contract.

  4. Matt - Feb 5, 2016 at 2:26 PM

    Since we have plenty of cap space this coming year and we most likely will not be competing for the Superbowl, would it make more sense to load up cousins contract on the front end so we have more money to spend on the back?

    • Rich Tandler - Feb 5, 2016 at 2:39 PM

      It doesn’t really make a whole lot of difference since unused cap space rolls over from year to year.

    • bangkokben - Feb 5, 2016 at 3:37 PM

      On the surface, we’re not competing for a Super Bowl. Did anyone outside Charlotte think in February last year, that Carolina would not only be “competing” for a Super Bowl but the prohibitive favorite? When did that even happen? There were a bunch of undefeated teams for some time. Carolina didn’t get any respect for being contenders until, maybe the ‘skins game. So a lot can happen between now and November for ANY team including our ‘skins.

      As for the contract, if it’s going to take the same cap % each year, it doesn’t really matter then, does it?

  5. troylok - Feb 5, 2016 at 2:29 PM

    It is essential that there are performance clauses in a contract for a player who has really only had one year of good performance. I have faith in the guy but the team has to protect themselves. There have been way too many one year wonders in the league. I’d be of the school of thought that maybe you pay a little more without guaranteed money and then let the team pick up an option with guaranteed money after he shows 2015 was not a fluke.

    • Rich Tandler - Feb 5, 2016 at 2:40 PM

      Cousins can go elsewhere and get a deal without performance clauses and with a lot of guaranteed money. His agent is pretty sharp, he’s not going to give in to a team-friendly deal.

    • Mr.moneylover - Feb 5, 2016 at 3:53 PM

      Rich tandler hit nail with the hammer…he can easy look at the redskins offer and say no we decline this offer and decide to test free agency and knowing scot m. And hear what he had to say to the media it seems he not overly excited of what happen this pass season and it also sounds like he’d not willing to over pay kirk cousins to keep him and put the whole franchise down the drain because of a contract a player didn’t earn…the contract will have goals in it if they turn it down then dont be surprise if they let kirk cousins walk…scot m. Said using the franchise is a option doesn’t mean they will use it he know 20 mill is a lot of money for just one year…he know Seattle went to the playoffs three years in a row without a QB but with a very good defense…the team has to many wholes to fix to give a player 20 mill on a one year deal scot m. Wanna sure up the defensive side of the ball and add depth on the O-line

      • Rich Tandler - Feb 5, 2016 at 4:11 PM

        I hate to bring another dose of reality, money, but there is zero chance the Redskins will let Cousins walk. They will franchise tag him if they can’t reach a contract agreement.

        I was speaking hypothetically about Cousins not taking an incentive loaded deal or one the Redskins could easily get out of after a year. The agent would not take a non-market deal and the Redskins would be forced to franchise.

        • Mr.moneylover - Feb 5, 2016 at 4:32 PM

          But that’s stupid to over pay kirk cousins when there is other needs to be fill on the team…scot m. Said gives players money that they earn…defense wins championships not QBs we have to many wholes on this team to be over paying plus scot m. Like to set examples for other players like he did what Niles Paul contract…I think its long term or nothing that’s the kinda vibe I got from scot m. …He said long term is a more logic choice he wants to get a long term deal done instead…when you have to mess with other players money thats not a good example you want to set when you in the middle of changing the culture of a franchise because believe it or not players keeping a eye out on kirk cousins contract situation

        • Rich Tandler - Feb 5, 2016 at 4:49 PM

          Two points:

          1). If you don’t have a quarterback you don’t have anything.
          2). If you can’t figure out how to work with a few million more dollars on a $153 million cap that is going to go up $10 million or so per year the rest of the decade you shouldn’t be trying to manage a cap.

          And a third–The market is what it is. You can’t pay $150,000 for a house the market says is worth $200,000 just because the lower figure works for you.

  6. timwillhide - Feb 5, 2016 at 2:47 PM

    I would rather we see him do it next year before offering a long term Contract It willbe his 33rd year in the system so he should be excelling. It will also be the 3rd year in the scheme for most of the players on offense. If he performs then work out a contract. If not we can cut him loose without oweing anything. Franchise Tag the guy.

    • Mr.moneylover - Feb 5, 2016 at 3:20 PM

      Franchise tag cost 20mill that’s way to much Money scot m. Not gonna want to do that…I think when it’s said and done its either long term deal or nothing…

    • renhoekk2 - Feb 5, 2016 at 3:43 PM

      Tag for a QB this year will be over $20M. Say he performs well next season? Then what? Cousins will have even MORE leverage in negotiations next season. To franchise him again would be $25M. So now you REALLY have to pay him, tag him again for $25M or let him walk and set your franchise back. So you can pay him $20 and $25M for the next two seasons or something like Rich offered $18M per? Which sounds better? Basically if they gamble on Cousins flopping next season and lose, they will get killed by the cap or lose their starting QB.

      • Mr.moneylover - Feb 5, 2016 at 3:57 PM

        Well by then redskins will know he’s not a one hit wonder IF he plays well next season and if he wanna leave next season since we ain’t get a long term deal done then we will have somebody else ready to go…the schedule will be much harder next season

      • bangkokben - Feb 5, 2016 at 4:01 PM

        Good analysis. But giving Cousins a long-term deal will guarantee to Cousins and everyone that he has at least two years to sink or swim. After the second year, cutting him loose will likely save more money than the dead money left on the cap. Can’t/won’t be done after one year.

        • Mr.moneylover - Feb 5, 2016 at 4:16 PM

          Exactly that’s my point…long term deal is logic…ppl think giving kirk cousins a long term is a bad decision its actually better because his contract will be flexible enough to were redskins can cut him at any point if he don’t improve they will not be stuck with him giving him a 20+ mill dollar franchise tag will be actually setting the franchise back because our depth won’t improve when it should cause we won’t have the money to do so

      • Mr.moneylover - Feb 5, 2016 at 4:11 PM

        Your not setting the franchise back if you let a one hit wonder go…you really want to over pay a guy for one average season he had I know ppl not use to us having success but it don’t make sense to over pay a guy and he go out there and show you he can’t beat tough teams…did you see our defense depth ???did you see our O-line depth ???? It won’t make sense to over pay a guy when there’s other problems on the team…working out a long term contract gonna take some time and I think you can tell they don’t plan giving him a crazy amount because they haven’t ask nobody to rework they contract yet….long term contract with goals is a better option because if he doesn’t play well his contract will be flexible enough for redskins to release him and not take a big cap hit…contract will look something like this….playoff win year 1 MVP year 2 super bowl year three…the more he improve the more the money he gets thats the kinda contract redskins gonna offer…

  7. kenlinkins - Feb 5, 2016 at 4:56 PM

    IMO what should have happened if Allen was ready to address RG3’s 2016 status is right after meeting with him put out a press release: ” Due to Roberts $16 million cap number for 2016, today the Redskins released him from his contract” followed by either A. “We know Robert will find his place in the NFL and he wish him luck” OR B. ” We would love to talk to Robert about playing a back up roll at QB in 2016 if he has a mind to.” END OF STATEMENT. IMO you learn this back in High School, you do not go around telling everyone you are breaking up with your girlfriend until after you tell her face to face first. This is known as being a stand up guy. I now wonder if all this talk from Redskins management about wanting only players would do things the correct way, how much of that is just PR and how much is real. Allen made a mistake, he should do what he would want a player to do, stand up and own it!

    • Rich Tandler - Feb 5, 2016 at 5:10 PM

      So, Ken, are you sure that Griffin hasn’t been told he will be released? He completely cleaned out his locker for a reason (even most who are slated to be free agents left a substantial amount in their lockers). I’m sure the subject came up in exit interviews if not sooner. If he heard what Allen said, I doubt he was surprised or even hurt in the least.

      Again, I don’t like defending Allen because he’s screwed up plenty. But the release of RG3 is a done deal.

      • kenlinkins - Feb 5, 2016 at 5:28 PM

        Rich, you make a good point about the Exit interviews and RG3 cleaning out his locker, but I would ask why the delay in officially cutting him? If they agreed to wait until after the Super Bowl (just a guess on my part) or any agreement to any other time frame why (i.e. set a date, RG3 leaving on good terms) why is Allen talking about it? If they have not agreed why is Allen talking about it. The only way I would agree with you would be if RG3 was TOLD he was going to be released after he cleaned out his locker and the Redskins would do it how ever they wanted (i.e. the Redskins were up set with the way he departed). If that is the case, I take back my statement about Allen being a stand up guy (as they did meet face to face and stated their positions).

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 5, 2016 at 8:27 PM

          Ken, I can only assume at this point that releasing RG3 OFFICIALLY is contingent on getting a contract done with Cousins. RG3 may be an insurance policy if, by some very unlikely event, a deal with Cousins isn’t possible. In the worst case scenario; everyone, including me, is expecting the team would just tag Cousins. However, if the organization is actually willing to absorb a franchise tag on Cousins then RG3 should have been officially released by now. If someone can come up with a better reason as to why RG3 hasn’t been released then I’d sure love to read one. The process of letting RG3 go has been dragging on longer than most divorces.

        • bangkokben - Feb 5, 2016 at 9:44 PM

          They can’t release him until the day after the Super Bowl.

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 6, 2016 at 10:47 AM

          Correct Bang, that was my oversight but I hope the Redskins release RG3 right away to put an end to this saga. However, I regrettably think they may hold him until the Cousins signing is done.

        • kenlinkins - Feb 6, 2016 at 11:05 AM

          Rich: It is true that the Redskins can not release RG3 until after the Super Bowl?

    • John - Feb 6, 2016 at 5:40 PM

      Seriously Ken. The NFL stands for not so long. All the talk of teams being like family is crap. When was the last time you put your kids out in the street for getting Cs instead of As?

  8. kenlinkins - Feb 5, 2016 at 5:14 PM

    As for the Cousins deal, the question is not how much as the limit for 2016 is about $19 million due to the tag, but how long do you commit to him as your QB. It is no different that placing a draft value on a rookie. Where do you see this player in the next two / three years? Do you believe he is a QB that can take you to the Super Bowl within that time frame? If yes, you pay the man the market value, if not, you pass on the deal, if you are not sure and require another year you TAG him. This is what the GM gets the big bucks for, knowing the REAL value of everyone he places on the roster and trying to keep the roster “right sized / right cost”. It the GM is not sure about Cousins true value (i.e. talent level) then he must either Pass or Tag as giving away big money because you do not have a plan B yet a QB is never a good idea. We will know soon what the GM thinks of Cousins performance by his next action. TAG = Not Sure, Deal = believes Cousin is “The One” or Pass = Not even close. IMO the GM will Tag him unless he can work out a deal that is 3 years and AVG about $14 million (3 years, total $42 million with $28 million guaranteed).

  9. James McFullan - Feb 6, 2016 at 12:18 AM

    Give Kirk Cousins a 4 year 74 million dollar contract with playoff and super bowl bonuses along with pro bowl bonuses. Then cut RGIII, Hatcher (if he doesn’t retire), DHall, and Andre Roberts. Restructure Goldson, Garçon, and DJax. Then trade a 3rd round pick and Lichtensteiger for Kam Chancellor. Then draft the top Defensive Lineman available the first round. Then draft Nick Martin in the second round to be our center of the future, he is 6-4 301, but could probably put on a few more pounds and then with Lauvao back, the run game should do well this year. Plus we all saw what Kirk can do through the air. Plus some new Defensive Lineman, Preston Smith with a year under his belt, Junior Galette, Ryan Kerrigan, and the tandem of Mason Foster and Will Compton the Redskins should do well this year against the run. Then with the Kam Chancellor trade mentioned earlier, that would help with the run and pass.

  10. Ron - Feb 6, 2016 at 6:47 AM

    The Redskins better not Mismanage Cousins’ Contract Negotiations. Their are over 20 other NFL Teams that would trade for Cousins in a second for $18M a year plus.
    It is Good that Bruce Allen is responsible and not that Idiot , Vinny Cerrato.

    • Rich Tandler - Feb 6, 2016 at 7:25 AM

      We haven’t heard from the “trade Cousins” contingent yet! Welcome.

    • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 6, 2016 at 10:59 AM

      I’d be interested in you listing these over 20 NFL Teams that would trade for Cousins and play him 18 million a year. He didn’t demonstrate enough to garner a legion of 20 teams in the NFL to go after him.

      I count far less and that includes reaching on some teams…
      1. NY Jets
      2. Buffalo Bills
      3. Cleveland Browns
      4. Houston Texans
      5. Denver Broncos
      6. Philadelphia Eagles
      7. Dallas Cowboys
      8. Arizona Cardinals

  11. redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 6, 2016 at 11:48 AM

    The simple solution is to work the contract in a way that mitigates damage in the initial years and is voidable in the back end. A big signing bonus is not the solution because it only prorates the cap hit, it doesn’t reduce it. In the end, Cousins will probably receive an offer for more than what he is actually worth based on his current resume. However, that won’t stop his agent from pushing even further into the market value. This puts the team in a precarious situation since Cousins’ leverage is that RG3 is currently the only QB with a contract on the roster. This is why I think its important the organization also part ways with Colt McCoy and invest in a young QB out of the draft. They need an alternative long term solution in case Cousins plateaus into mediocrity or worst. Sure the team could just acquire another journeyman QB as backup but if Cousins flops then this team is back to another hopeless scenario of having no true franchise QB to carry them into the playoffs. The setback could take years to correct.

    It’s not a strong draft for quarterbacks but don’t be surprised if the team’s 1st pick is a QB to provide insurance for Cousins. I don’t expect Scot to just draft a QB out of desperation, but if one becomes available in the early rounds that he finds a valued pick then I think he’ll take him over other perceived bigger position needs. I haven’t followed many of the QBs that are projected as 1st round picks. With all the talent on the defense line this year in the draft, I have to expect they’ll select a player from that position first. However all following rounds are just as likely a QB will be selected as any other position.

    • John - Feb 7, 2016 at 12:08 AM

      There are several QBs that can be drafted in the mid rounds. 2 examples would be the QBs at Stanford and USC.

      They need defensive linemen, if not one in the first round, move down by trading our 1st for a 2nd and 3rd. They also need a dynamic running back and draft a receiver with size and speed as an eventual replacement for Garcon. They also need to think center or guard, depending on availability. Last but not least a safety that could be developed.

      • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 7, 2016 at 12:29 AM

        Unfortunately you won’t be able to fill all those positions in this draft. I don’t argue that defensive line is the most likely choice for the 1st selection. It’s the best pool of talent to select from at the 21 spot. I don’t see the need to draft wide receiver early. Ultimately, I think it will come down to the best players that become available. My point is that a young promising QB isn’t out of the question. If they do go after a skill position then I certainly hope Scot doesn’t follow BR’s advice where they have the Redskins selecting Laquon Treadwell WR. He’s not very fast and would be an eventual replacement for Garcon. If you want a dynamic running back then I’d have no issue if Ezekiel Elliott is picked at 21. I think he’d be an immediate impact player with big play ability as a rookie. However, I don’t think he’ll be available that late in the 1st round. In the end, I fully trust the direction Scot chooses in the draft. He did a nice job last season and hopefully Scot will have better success in FA this season.

        • John - Feb 7, 2016 at 9:34 AM

          They’ll draft whoever, whenever based on what’s on the board at that time. Not necessarily a WR or RB, but the RB will be in the first couple of rounds.

          This offense lacks a truly dynamic back. One who can run and catch but also has some moves. Thompson was a decent receiver but someone like Reggie Bush would be awesome. A runner like the kid in Atlanta that ran through our defense would be nice.

          We totally lack a WR that demands double coverage. The receivers we have are all interdependent but none can get it done alone. We could use someone like Bryant, Jones, Green, etc.

          A beast is needed on the D Line. We need someone who will blow up plays. Nobody and I mean nobody on the defense does that now.

          Another road grading guard or a stout center would also make a difference.

          They will more than likely need another draft after this one. I doubt they can get all the pieces in the draft and free agency this year.

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 7, 2016 at 10:34 AM

          “We totally lack a WR that demands double coverage.”

          That’s just not true unless you are assuming Jackson is off the roster next season. If all the WRs stay on the squad next season then that is plenty to move the offense by the air. There is very likely no WR out of the draft to select that will provide what you are asking. And I certainly don’t want to add another big salary off season contract on another wide out. We should just stay put with the WRs from last season. Since Reed, Jackson, Garcon, Crowder, and Paul coming back are enough weapons for Cousins to utilize in the passing game. The Abanig (sic) poster and I have a good conversations about adding Marvin Jones from FA. Now that would be a player to consider that would not impact the cap if the team rids itself of Andre Roberts. He has the length everyone wants and plays fast on the field. He and Jackson together would stretch the field in ways we haven’t seen since 2012.

          I also don’t think a RB will be selected in the first few rounds. That’s another position that does not need to supersede positions like interior D-line, safety, O-line, CB, or even a backup for Cousins. Yes someone like Ezekiel Elliott could make that exception because he could just happened to be the best player available. However, I seriously don’t see a guy like him being available for the 21st pick, nor do I see Derrick Henry becoming available in the latter 2nd round that would compel selecting someone over bigger need positions.

        • John - Feb 7, 2016 at 1:59 PM


          I’m not dissing Jackson. He’s an awesome deep threat, but not someone I’d be comfortable throwing it to him 10 times a game or in traffic over the middle or in the red zone. You’d eventually land him on IR of the ER because of his slight frame. His getting deep opens up things for everyone else, especially Reed.

          Regarding Garcon, word is he’s not up to taking a pay cut, so he may walk. He also has slowed down and seems to disappear at times.

          Crowder is for real but like Garcon is not a deep threat. Hopefully in year 2, he’ll do better on punt returns.

          It remains to be seen on Paul, one recovering from the ankle and two, how he’ll play with the extra weight.

          Carrier looked good for a guy who came in at the last minute. Needs to work on hid blocking but that should improve.

          Roberts needs to be cut loose and Ryan Grant could roll out as well. For a guy who is supposed to run good routes he sure trips up a lot…

          All the pieces work well but take one away and they struggle. In the Jets game they lacked Jackson and Reed And look what happened.

          They don’t have to get that bigtime WR in the 1st round but if one falls in their laps, they should consider it. Same with running back. Their running game lacks dynamism. You can have a great line but if your back is average at best, its not going to help the passing game.

          There are several good Dlineman coming out but they really need a bbeast, a disruptor. Someone the other team has to account for on every play, that frees up other guys around him.

  12. robert herrera - Feb 6, 2016 at 12:26 PM

    I believe in the first two picks for the Redskins 2016 draft should be defense. Kenny Clark would be more of a solid pick. Second should be a great corner like Eli Apple or the guy who was voted best cornerback in the senior bowl.

  13. robert herrera - Feb 6, 2016 at 12:36 PM

    Its clear the Redskins suffered in the running game. I don’t think alfred Morris isn’t the only problem; we need help with a new bigger center in the draft and another guard. Three running backs that can help the Redskins running game if the coaches are wise to look at these guys. One is collins, Kenyan Drake and devan rockhead johnson.

  14. Rich - Feb 6, 2016 at 3:56 PM

    Without cousins we have no team. We will pay him whatever he wants. Redskins have no choice

    • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 6, 2016 at 5:02 PM

      Are you the drunk version of Rich?

      The question could easily be asked about what Cousins is as a QB without Reed? Yes, Cousins will get a contract offer that exceeds his true value at this point in his career. However, to capitulate like you are suggesting is, well I’ll steal from that famous response General Anthony McAuliffe made to the Germans, Nuts!

  15. smotion55 - Feb 6, 2016 at 8:00 PM

    We need stability at QB and Cousins is not going anywhere. If you tag him you still have 3 months to get a deal done Guys before it takes effect. And whoever said RG3 is an insurance policy in case we don’t sign Kirk is stupid. If anything RG3 the getting in the way. A smart GM will release him the day after the Super Bowl and wish nothing but the best in life. He might get better but he just needs to be gone PERIOD.
    The deal for Cousins will be in 17 to 18 million range and some signing bonus. That is not over paying in this league anymore. The cap will go up and we will be drafting 8 to 10 new players every year that will be cheaper then high priced free agents. This GM will get rid of a few more guys with a high salary and or re-structure a couple of them and generate even more money. The GM and the front office know what they are doing and will not over pay people. They will GET ER DUNN, So just chill and enjoy the Super Bowl .

    • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 6, 2016 at 9:05 PM

      Stupidity normally applies to an inability to comprehend what one reads. This must apply to you. The insurance policy was an assumption if RG3 remains on the roster beyond the opportunity to waive him. Here is another scenario you must not be able to comprehend because your stupidity limits your ability of seeing the big picture; if RG3 is released before Cousins is signed then the Redskins have no quarterback on the roster. That’s gives Cousins incredible leverage in a contract negotiations. Now if the team does releases RG3 immediately then that probably indicates the contract negotiations is going well. If RG3 is not released then it may imply that contract negotiations have hit a snag.

      Now, I expect that even if contract negotiations are not going well, the worst case scenario is that Cousins will get the franchise tag. However, that is a 20 million dollar cap hit vs RG3 at 16 million dollar cap hit. Yes 16 million dose cost less than 20 million. So there is some leverage with retaining RG3 until March 9th to insure a deal will be done sooner than later. And guess what, genius? It cost the team NOTHING to hold RG3 until that date while contract talks are ongoing. Stupidity is for a business to get into a negotiation with no bargaining power and no contingency plan regardless of how implausible keeping RG3 may appear.

  16. James McFullan - Feb 7, 2016 at 3:55 AM

    Redskins have about 10 million in cap space, when they cut RGIII it will be 26 million, if the Redskins traded Lichtensteiger and a 3rd round pick for Chancellor, it would be 6.1 million to Kam, but the Redskins would save 4.05 million cut DHall, Dave 4 million, cut hatcher, save 6 million, cut Roberts, save 3 million. That leaves the Redskins with 37 million. Resign Galette to a similar deal to last years, that’s about 36 million, resign cousins for about 18 million, that’s still 18 million left over, draft a defensive Lineman in the first round, that is about 16 million left over, draft Nick Martin in the second round, that is about 15 million left. The Redskins can then resign their own players, that would leave them with about 7-8 million dollars left. Resign Jordan Reed, have him make about 3-4 million this year, that is about 3-5 million left. They could then save that money for next year or sign a free agent they feel could be useful to the team. Then the Redskins, if need be they could restructure a few contracts bump up the cap space to about 8-10 million left if they want to sign a big name free agent which seems very unlikely. With all the changes, the Redskins would improve in the run game with a big powerful center and Lauvao back, plus another year under the belts of Scherff and Moses, plus the help of Callahan with all the Offensive line, run game improves. With a full off season to prepare as the starter, plus getting Niles Paul back, and the extra reps between Garçon, Jackson, Crowder (with another year under his belt and being the starter the whole season), Reed, and any free agents or draftee recievers or tight ends, Kirk Cousins and the pass game should do very well. Plus the trio of Galette, Kerrigan, and Smith rushing the passer, they can do some damage and then Will Compton and Mason Foster building chemistry by working together through the offseason, along with a young first round defensive Lineman and potentially a new nose tackle the front seven should do well against the pass and run. Then if Culliver can stay healthy and Breeland with the guidance of Fewell can do well covering number 1 and 2 recievers. Kyshoen Jarrett also proved he is good in the slot and at safety positions. Plus the addition Chancellor and Goldson already there, that should help with the pass and run. Also, with the extra money left over from free agency, the Redskins could sign Tashaun Gipson to be the starting free safety once Goldson is gone and he is a good player that can be had for relatively cheap after he had a down year due to some injuries this year, but when he was healthy in 2014 he had 5 interceptions. With all the changes listed above, I believe the Redskins will make it to at least the divisional round or championship round of the playoffs in 2016 and in 2017, the Redskins will be the winners of Super Bowl 52.

    • Rich Tandler - Feb 7, 2016 at 6:54 AM

      Sorry, the Seahawks are not going give away Kam for a 31-year-old center and a third.

      • James McFullan - Feb 7, 2016 at 4:05 PM

        Since the Seahawks gave away their best center last year, and since they run a zone blocking scheme which is Kory Lichtensteiger’s strong suit, they may want a new center and the way Kam refused to play for the first two games of the season, they may be willing to get rid of him for a center and 3rd round pick plus some money compensation. Plus the Seahawks could probably pick up a pretty good safety in the 3rd round

        • redskinsnameisheretostay - Feb 7, 2016 at 8:32 PM

          No way possible the best safety in the game since Ed Reed would be traded for what you are offering. Seattle didn’t build a super bowl roster by taking such inferior trade offers. If you add a 1st round pick to go with a 3rd round and Lich’ then you just might get Seattle’s attention. If I was Seattle I still wouldn’t give Kam for a 1st, 3rd, and Lich. Simply put, what you are offering would result in one very succinct response from Seattle; “click!”.

    • John - Feb 7, 2016 at 9:37 AM

      A lot of wishful thing going on there. Archives

Follow Us On Twitter