Amid rampant reports from various "sources" that no long-term deal will be reached between the Redskins and Kirk Cousins before the start of free agency begins, the question of WHY is being floated around various Internet hubs and among many media personalities. Right now, everyone is looking to pin the blame on someone, and rightfully so.
Unsubstantiated rumors by many "talking heads" are pointing the finger at team President Bruce Allen and General Manager Scot McCloughan, as being the ones who are reluctant to pay Cousins like a top 5 quarterback in this league.
Sally Jenkins wrote yesterday:
The front office insulted him, refused to make him a worthy contract offer last year, while hurling its checkbook at Josh Norman. Now Washington is the insecure party and Cousins is set for life, no matter what team he plays for, and every young player in the league should be banging on the door of his agent, Mike McCartney of Priority Sports, asking how he did it. Here’s the secret: Treat yourself as valuable even when your owner doesn’t. Don’t ever let a front office tell you who you are. You tell them.
If you listen to the tone of the remarks Cousins has made since last season ended about what’s “a fair deal,” and the need to be “selfish,” it’s obvious that the old “take one for the team” or “give us a hometown discount because you want to raise you kids here” pleas and ploys aren’t going to work with him. Nor should they.
You can read the entire article Here via a spin-off from the Denver Post.
Jeremy Bergman from NFL.com reported last summer that the Redskins did offer Cousins a long term deal last year at the NFL Scouting Combine. The offer was reported as a multi-year deal worth $16 million per year, and $24 million in guaranteed money.
If he had accepted the deal, Cousins would have ranked 21st in average annual salary among quarterbacks, tied with Bengals signal-caller Andy Dalton. As it stands, Cousins will make $20 million under the franchise tag in 2016, $4 million more than the Redskins' multi-year offer.
It was very apparent that the Redskins brass did not believe in Cousins heading into the 2016 season, and their application of the franchise tag, and low-ball offer, were proof of that. This off-season, the ball is squarely in Cousins' court, and after the way he was treated last season, it's no surprise that some hard feelings may linger.
So, for a team who hasn't had a quality starting quarterback in decades, did the Redskins make a monumental mistake by "insulting" Cousins with a low-ball offer last off-season? If so, will that decision come back to haunt the franchise this off-season if and when they attempt to get a long-term deal inked?