Shaw66

He says things before he thinks about them. Spouted off a lot about getting traded. Said too much right after that night club incident. The result is that you hear him apologizing a day or two later. He's learning. He was really unhappy after the playoff game, because they didn't run the ball on first and one. He went right up to the edge of saying something stupid, then stopped and said it's not his decision.

Yeah, difference in philosophy. Succeeding the NFL is brutally difficult, and there isn't one formula. I've said it before: I'd love to be sitting the room, listening to McBeane talk about this stuff. I'd love to know what they're thinking. As interested as I am in football, I've never really spent any time thinking about things like the cap. To me, that's all just business, and the business people can figure it out. It's complicated. Having said that, I'm sure they can do it. I think there are limits as to how much money you can push into one year, as you suggest. I think if the total money in any one year that is a lot more than the average of the whole deal, the League automatically converts a big chunk of it to signing bonus instead of one-year money and spreads that chunk over the entire contract, like a signing bonus. You can pay the guy a dollar this year and $30 million a year for the next four, and that will reduce the cap hit in the first year, but the cap hit in year one will be a lot more than a dollar. It would probably be $24 million, or something like that. Some folks here understand those rules. The point is, if they want Cousins, the business people will figure out how to get him what he wants and structure it in a way that is as cap friendly for the Bills as possible. The cap can be managed. There are only three questions: Do the Bills want him, are the Bills willing to pay what it takes to get him, and does he want to be in Buffalo. Answer all three yes and he's in Buffalo. Answer any one of those no and he's somewhere else.

I don't know if we want the Bills to be known for beer and jumping on tables, but I love being known for the passion. Shady didn't have to write this piece. In his own way, I think he's a thoughtful guy and I think this whole experience has moved him. Remember when he first was traded, how he reacted to having to leave Philly. I was disappointed, but I felt for him, too. It was hard. For his first two years with the Bills, you could see his attitude changing. He was feeling it. But as he says, what it really took was the culture change in the locker room. We've thought what happened inside those doors had changed, but this is one of the first times we're hearing a player really talk about it. He's REALLY feeling it now. Bodes well for a lot of things. Free agents are hearing and seeing this. If the Bills are talking to a guy, especially a younger guy, and Shady McCoy calls him with this talk, that means something. It also means that when team activities begin in a couple of months, there's going to be a whole new attitude, from day 1. Everyone returning already gets it. When rookies come in, they're going to see, from day 1, what it takes to be part of this team. Hasn't felt this good to be a Bills fan in a long time. T You know, I didn't, either. But after watching him and listening to him, I've come to conclude several things about him: 1. Simply physically, he's a great running back. One of the best ever. 2. He has the heart of a great running back. He avoids tackles and goes down easily, but if you need three yards he gets you four, not two. 3. He shoots his mouth off a bit too much and says some things he shouldn't, but he isn't a jerk. Several times now, it's become clear that he understands what he said wrong and regrets it. This whole article has a little of the sound of an apology for not reacting more positively when he was traded. All you need to know about Shady is the image of him lying on the field, pounding the ground with his fist when he hurt his ankle in the Miami game. All you need to know about Shady is what he did to get himself back on the field the following week.

I was surprised and I'd guess you were too.

So it was a little work, but Pro Football Reference has data about 4th quarter comebacks and game winning drives. You can find the games, if you want, but just looking at the totals, Cousins is your guy. 2015 through 2017, 4th quarter comebacks and game winning drives: Matt Stafford had 15. Cousins and Carr had 12. Ryan and Palmer had 10. Brees, Wilson and Eli had 9. Beside the fact that Cousins is second on the list, notice anything else? They're all big names, all guys you'd ordinarily put in the top 10 or, in Eli's case, has won two Super Bowls. These are good QBs. Cousins? Clutch? Check that box.

This is a really good article, as far as it goes. It's really good in laying out the cap situation, what Cousins has done in his career so far, etc. It's really good about the contract the Cousins will get. His stats put him in the top 10, and his contract will put him there. Sure, he'll be at the top of the list, but that's only because the value of QB contracts keeps going up. What he will get isn't going to be out of line. But it's pretty weak on analysis. He concludes that McBeane should "stick with the plan," but McBeane have never said that the plan is to get a QB in the draft. They have said they want to build through draft with some free agents added in. So signing a free agent quarterback isn't necessarily contrary to the plan. He also just says McBeane would like to have a rookie whom they can develop the way they want, and that way they'll have a younger guy. Well, What we need to know, and we don't, is what kind of quarterback McBeane want. If Cousins is exactly what they're looking for, why wouldn't they sign him? Maybe it's Bridgewater. I don't know, but Sal doesn't explain why McBeane wouldn't sign a free agent QB. He also says McBeane would prefer to draft a rookie whom they can develop the way they want, and that rookie would be several years younger. He doesn't discuss the downside of that approach. First, if you get the wrong guy, you have nothing three or four years from now. If you have Cousins, you've already gotten three or four good years from him, and you probably have three or four more good ones. Plenty of time to develop someone. Second, even if you have the right guy, it might take 3 or 4 years to get him to top 10 performance. It took Brady that long, Luck isn't there yet. Sal doesn't take into consideration how long it will take for the drafted guy to be worth it, and he doesn't take into consideration the odds that the guy won't ever develop. Plus, by the time the rookie gets good, he'll need a new contract, and all the cap space you've saved by not signing Cousins and then spent of others will be gone, and you'll need to be managing cap for a $30 or $35 million contract. Essentially, all he's said is that he'd take his chances in the draft. Doing that gives some higher upside potential but also gives him higher likelihood that his QB doesn't pan out. Fact is, we're not going to know anything until we see what McBeane do. They're not going to tell us what's important to them, and without than, we just don't know.

How does an NFL coach find time during the season to scout college football QBs? I thought all the scouting in the Fall was done by the scouts, with the coaches getting involved after the season ends. I think these are the comments of fan. Like, "Mason Rudolph is great! I saw him though a long touchdown pass." Now, that's some real in depth scouting.

I've always thought the Pats made Brady a winner, not the other way around.

I think people are naive about what it takes to be really good. Brady was regularly the 8th to 10th rated QB early in his career, right where Cousins is. Brady learned his way to greatness. Whether Cousins will be great, I don't know, but he's put himself on the learning path. He believes in it. Belichick wins because his team is better prepared. Almost always better prepared. He says you prepare and prepare and then the game begins and you make changes to respond to what the other team is doing, but the changes are possible because you prepared. And, I haven't talked about this before, but some of it is simply brain power. How well and how quickly can you digest information on the field and make decisions? That's what the Wonderlic is supposed to test. I think Cousins is easily within the top 10 of QB Wonderlic scores. Cousins with Belichick could be another 10 years of misery. Brady could announce his retirement after the Super Bowl. Of the Pats could cut him. Both could happen before March. The Cousins auction doesn't begin until March. I'm not saying it will happen, but it would be a nightmare. I think Cousins would go there in a heartbeat.

This quote struck me. This quote relates to the idea that Cousins isn't good enough because the Redskins haven't won enough when he was at QB. It's part of the argument about whether to attribute wins to the QB. Well, if he isn't good enough because his team hasn't won enough, then it isn't worth spending money on any of the free agents. May as well cut Tyrod, trade up and take your chances, because there is no other solution. But the fundamental point is at least flawed, if not out and out wrong. From the Bills' point of view, where would be the absolute WORST place for Cousins to go? Absolute worst. Someone suggested it earlier. Brady retires next week and Cousins signs in New England. Why is that the worst? Because Cousins fits what Belichick wants EXACTLY. A guy with a good enough arm who studies all the time, works hard, learns and improves. By the way, Brady's passer ratings in his early years are just like Cousins. He didn't turn into a premier QB until he reached 30. But, you say, the Patriots are already winners. Yes, and that's exactly the point. Why are the Patriots already winners? Because of Brady? Only in part. It's because of Belichick. Give Belichick the right QB and he's going to win. IT'S NOT ABOUT THE PLAYERS. If it were about the players, Denver would have been better last year. It's about the coach. So it makes no sense to me to say you don't want Cousins because his team didn't win. Wins aren't a measure of his value and his ability. The best measure, which is far from perfect but it's all you have, are his personal stats, and the shorthand for those is his passer rating. Let's look at another example: Flacco. Flacco is 8-8 and 9-7 the last two years. Does that mean you don't want Flacco? I don't want Flacco, but not because his team has played 500 ball. I don't want him because his passer rating is consistently in the low 80s. HIS TEAM IS 8-8 BECAUSE HE ISN'T VERY GOOD, AS SHOWN BY HIS STATS. Cousins' passer rating is consistently in the top 10 in the league, Flacco around 20. I get that some of you don't like Flacco for one reason or another, but it makes no sense to say he isn't good enough because he hasn't won in the NFL. If that's your argument, then the only to get a quarterback is to draft one, start him for four years or less until you decide he can't win in the NFL and then draft another one. Good luck with that.

Man, I'd be pissed BIG TIME if Brady retired and Cousins went to New England.

Maybe you can link to it again. And there's an ESPN article from late last year. If people would read these descriptions of who Cousins is, I think they will begin to see. Cousins thinks about the game and about how to achieve success in what seems to be the same way McDermott thinks about it. That can be a powerful combination, coach and quarterback committed to the same process to achieve success.

The past is past, but you're right. Mahomes, Watson, Prescott, Wilson, Garappolo, Cousins and I'm probably missing a few. THe Bills have had some woeful picks and non-picks over the past 10 years. All the more reason to get it right this year.

I think this is a typical fan reaction and doesn't reflect at all how players look at it, except for the star players nearing the end of their careers. Those guys want a team that's poised to win it all, because they see this is their last chance. A guy like Cousins is deliberate and thoughtful. He understands completely that the head coach is the MOST IMPORTANT part of the equation. He understands that winning the Super Bowl two years ago is ancient history, and that the remnants of that teams are not enough to get to the Super Bowl. He understands that every team is being built and rebuilt all the time The team that signs Cousins will sign him not because they think they'll win the Super Bowl next year, although they'd be happy if that happened. The team that signs will do it because they think he can make them competitive for the next six to eight years. Cousins understands exactly the same thing and is looking for the same thing: nice to win it all next season, more important to be on a team that's competitive for the next six to eight. He understands that the head coach, the GM, the owner and the culture are what's important. He's seen multiple years of chaotic change in Washington, and he knows that is not what wins. I'm not saying Denver won't appeal to him. Maybe Denver is his first choice. All I'm saying is that if it is his first choice, it won't be because he thinks Denver is closer to a championship; it'll be because he believes the Denver organization is most likely to be able to compete for multiple championships.

Thanks.

That makes sense, and I'm not arguing, because I don't know, but if Denver gave them a compensatory pick in order to talk to Cousins early, wouldn't that trade have to be announced? It's a deal - I let you talk to Cousins early, and if you sign him I get your X pick. That's a trade, and trades have to be reported to the league. The reason this sounds fishy to me is that the rules are set up to keep the free agency playing field level. To have all of this happening in secret, to have Denver just announce sometime "we had a deal with Washington to talk to Cousins early and we've reached a deal with Cousins and he's going to sign with us" doesn't seem at all how the free agent market is supposed to work.

Thanks. That makes sense. I'm not sold on Cousins, but I don think he's the best option to build a winner in the short term. Not a 100% option, but a better way to go considering all the variables. I'm just guessing about the midwest, but there's a lot of evidence suggesting it could be true. And I'm not interested in him because I think he's a Hall of Famer. I don't think he is. I think it's a mistake to say no to every candidate who isn't a certifiable Hall of Famer. You'll be waiting forever. I'm fine if you don't think he's good enough. There's a lot of evidence to support that belief.

He's not an unrestricted free agent until the period ends for the Redskins to franchise him. I think that's early March. Until then, he is exclusively Washington property. As others have said, he only can talk to other teams if the Redskins gave him permission, which may have happened. However, it's interesting that if Washington gave him permission, say, a week ago, that that information didn't leak out.

I would also expect Cousins to do his search more deliberately than this. Washington didn't tell him to look for a deal until they locked up Smith, at least I wouldn't think so, so that means Cousins made a decision really fast. Maybe he knew all along.

Thanks. Those are both good points. But can he get traded if he isn't under contract for 2018? He isn't under contract until he's franchised and he's signed. It may be true, but it seems kind of odd in this situation.

I don't get it. Did the Redskins cut Cousins? If not, he can't be talking to Denver; it violates his contract with Washington. It's tampering. And if they DID cut him, doesn't Denver talking to him violate the free agency rules? What am I missing?

Look, are we having a conversation, or are you just arguing because you like to argue? Yes, Kelly wasn't committed to Buffalo and it worked out okay. But the Bills OWNED THE RIGHTS to Kelly, and if Kelly wanted to play in the NFL he HAD to play in Buffalo. If he had been a free agent, he never would have signed in Buffalo. Cousins is completely different. He IS or will be a free agent, so the fact that he doesn't feel a commitment to Washington is a big deal. I don't care if you lived in the midwest and didn't like it. You aren't on the shortlist of QBs the Bills are interested in. Cousins is the one who matters, and he's a down-to-earth, hard-working midwest boy. Born there, raised there, went to high school and college there. I'm guessing he doesn't like the east. And, as someone else pointed out, the Redskins didn't exactly show him a lot of love when they talked contract. You asked me how can he be that good if Washington is giving up on him, and I answered - because he doesn't want to be there, not because Washington doesn't want him. Your response? Why is Washington giving up on him? Come up with something better.

You have to read other things I've written at length. First, there's no way Cousins isn't better than Taylor. He's a pocket passer with enough mobility as a guy needs these days. His numbers have been significantly better than Taylor's for three years. His three-year numbers are top 10 in the league. Second, he fits the McDermott philosophy. He's smart, hard working, believes that winning is a process and he's personally dedicated to process. He's the kind of guy who in a system with five-year continuity will get better each year, because he learns more and more. Washington is dumping him because he doesn't want to be there. They mismanaged their relationship with him, and I suspect he's told them he'll listen to their offer but he's certainly going to listen to others. Translation: if your offer isn't the very best, I'm leaving for someplace that suits me better. I don't know any of that, but that's my sense. He's a hard-working midwest guy who isn't at home in east coast bull ****. I think he wants out. So it's not so much that Washington doesn't want him, but they aren't willing to invest in a guy who isn't committed to them.

I don't think that McB will be regular big spenders in free agency. I think they want to grow their own talent by getting players in the draft, undrafted rookies, guys off practice squads. Hyde's about as high as I expect them to go for free agents. I expect their free agent spending will be on role players. Except QB. They might spend big on a QB. So that makes me think that they don't need to blow up the roster except to the extent that they need cap room to buy a QB, if they go that route. You certainly don't want to unload serviceable players to create cap room that you don't really want to use. And that then makes me think that they're not unloading guys whose cap savings are under $4 million. Why move a guy who's useful to you if you don't need the room. Seems to me Taylor, Glenn and Clay are the guys who are at risk.

It looks exactly the same to me. I'm going to have to make a big bet somewhere, and I think Cousins is the best bet.