StumpHunter wrote: ↑
Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:33 pm
Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑
Fri Mar 08, 2019 11:58 am
What? That literally makes zero sense. The WRs werent good enough? They both had career years under Cousins. We were 1 of 3 teams with TWO 1,000 yard WRs last year (Other teams were Pitt and LAR). How in any way is that "not good enough"? Yeah sure it would be nice to have a decent #3, but that would be all we need is a decent #3. Not a $20+ million dollar #3 (not saying the #3 would be Brown but clearly either Diggs or Thielen would and they are making big money). Our #3 WR last year played 51% of the snaps. Under pass happy Flip no less. So we should trade for Brown and have Thielen or Diggs play 50% of the snaps (will be even less in this new offense) because our WRs werent good enough for Cousins??.....yeah makes total sense
But go ahead....somehow make this into another "Kirk sucks" argument
Thielen is making #3 money and is at his best out of the slot. Plus, Brown wouldn't cost over 20 million this year, and the salary would only start hurting the team trading for him in 2020.
This isn't a Kirk Cousins sucks argument, it is the reality of the situation. The WRs, particularly the #3 WR, weren't good enough for Cousins last year, just like the line and the run game weren't. If they were, Cousins would have been able to find open receivers quicker, he would have been pressured and sacked less, and the offense wouldn't have been 22nd in scoring. You think that I am wrong about that?
Your logic just baffles me sometimes. Look at the updates man. We're currently in contract talks with Thielen. Do you really think he's going to be making #3 money much longer? No.
As for Brown's contract, in no way, shape or form would Brown's salary not effect us this year. We dont just get him for free. We would have to pay him roughly $12-$15 million this year. Not sure how you think we are going to land that cap space and still assess other needs. Which makes this trade unrealistic and foolish to even try and pull off.
And yeah, I think you're dead wrong about that. But this is just another nitpicky argument by you. Of course the #3 wasnt good enough. Nobody is questioning that. But as for Thielen and Diggs, they are two of the best route runners in the league. With them being good route runners doesnt just mean they are always open and Cousins shouldnt be getting sacked. That literally doesnt even make sense. Jared Goff was sacked 33 times this year and had the best trio of WRs in the league before Kupp went down. So does that mean they should be dumb and trade for Brown so they dont get sacked as much? No. If your line sucks at pass blocking, it sucks at pass blocking. Deshaun Watson had one of the better WR groups in the NFL. Granted both Coutee and Fuller got hurt but not early in the year. And he was getting sacked 5-7 times a game. Having 3 near elite WRs doesnt mean you're going to be sacked less. Never has that been a truth in the NFL.
Randall Cunningham had arguably the best WR core in the NFL in Moss, Carter and Reed. He also had an elite offensive line. And he was still sacked 20 times in 15 games. That's more than Andrew Luck was sacked in 16 games this year and he didnt have near the receiving core Cunningham did. And as good as Lucks OL was, they still werent as good as ours in 98 IMO. Another top WR group ever in the NFL was the 99 Rams. Warner was sacked 29 times with an elite OL and Holt, Bruce, Hakim and Proehl too.
So in the end, your argument literally makes no sense. We need a serviceable and consistent WR for a #3. Not a high priced, selfish, attention-wanting, whine as* cancer like Antonio Brown. No less it would not only cost us a lot of money that we dont have, it would prevent us filling other needs in free agency AND lose us draft picks. I literally cant believe I actually had to explain that to someone.