The deadline passed and no deals were done in Washington or elsewhere. Of the three NFL players whose clubs had extended them the franchise tender, Kirk Cousins among them, none signed long-term deals before the Monday deadline.
The Redskins, however, handled things differently from the Pittsburgh Steelers with running back Le’Veon Bell and Los Angeles Rams with cornerback Trumaine Johnson, all of whom will play on the franchise tag this year.
The main difference was The Statement. Unlike the Steelers or Rams, the Redskins, via team president Bruce Allen, publicly shared details of the offer they made to Cousins. On Monday, Allen said that the Redskins offered Cousins $53 million guaranteed at signing and $72 million guaranteed for injury over the life of the deal.
“But despite our repeated attempts,” Allen said as part of a six paragraph statement, “we have not received any offer from Kirk’s agent this year.”
And yes, it sounded an awful lot like he was saying “Kurt”.
Contrast that with the brief statement released by Steelers general manager Kevin Colbert Monday afternoon:
“Unfortunately, we were unable to agree to terms on a long-term contract with Le’Veon Bell prior to [Monday’s] deadline,” Colbert said. “Le’Veon is scheduled to play this year under the Exclusive Franchise Tag designation. We will resume our efforts to address his contract situation following the 2017 season.”
The Rams, who were never really expected to get a deal done with Johnson, let the deadline pass without a peep.
The details of the Steelers’ offer did leak out, but they didn’t come publicly from the team.
NFL Network’s Tom Pelissero reported that Pittsburgh offered Bell a five-year deal averaging over $12 million per year with $30 million in the first two years and $42 million over three years. The Steelers have a nasty habit of not offering guarantees in future contract years but, all things considered, that’s a strong offer. Bell will make $12.12 million this year playing on the franchise tag, which is head and shoulders above the going rate even for a premier running back.
No player is being greedy simply by trying to get paid fairly for their work but, in one sense, the Steelers would have had an easier time characterizing Bell this way because their offer was at market value. The Redskins’ to Cousins was not.
On Tuesday, Cousins went on 106.7 The Fan, a contractual appearance, and did a tricky thing. He was gracious and calm and spoke as if there was no bad blood between him and the Redskins. He took the high road and, in the process, made the team look better. He said Allen warned him that the statement was coming. He said he thought the team’s May 2 offer was fair, and would have been a good starting point, but that he really just needed more time and, therefore, preferred a one-year deal.
“There have been a lot of changes in our organization since the end of last season,” Cousins said. “I want to allow time to help make this decision.”
If Cousins is open to staying in Washington, then why would the team seemingly go after its starting quarterback in public? Why, if the Redskins still hope for a long-term deal next offseason, would they poison the well with Cousins this way?
It helps to understand that this decision was not made with the benefit of much time.
All of this has gone down since the weekend, when Allen flew to Michigan to work with Cousins and agent Mike McCartney face to face.
Allen’s star has dimmed in Washington, which may be putting it gently, but he is a former Executive of the Year who’s used to being in charge and getting his way. Perhaps he believes in his own powers of negotiation a little too much. He said that he would get this done, and he wasn’t able to. The fact that he made the weekend trip in person as a last-minute effort shows how badly he wanted to get a deal, and coming up short was surely humbling. On Monday, Allen seemed frustrated.
The call, made to about a half-dozen reporters including this one, to come to Redskins Park came early Monday afternoon. Just before 4 p.m., the group was ushered into a conference room filled with high-backed leather chairs and a sleek, oval-shaped table in a part of the team’s building reporters are not normally allowed into. A Redskins-branded microphone was stationed at one end of the table. No cameras were allowed in.
Right at 4 p.m., Allen came in and said that he was going to read a statement. He sat at the microphone and delivered the news that, despite his efforts, Cousins preferred to play on a one-year deal. It was surprising when he went into detail about the Redskins’ offer. It seemed like the kind of statement a team would make about a player who had just departed through free agency and was no longer with the team.
Allen read the statement and was asked if he would take questions. He said he would not and left the room.
Actions are almost always better predictors than words. There was no contract offer within the realm of reason that would have overpowered Cousins’ desire to take things one year at a time with the Redskins, for now. Cousins said as much on Tuesday, but the fact that he never wanted to make a counter offer had already spoken for itself.
The two best things Washington has going in terms of keeping Cousins around are the value of continuity and Jay Gruden’s system. Cousins knows that the Bradys and the Roethlisbergers of the world don’t go around switching teams very often.
The Redskins have things of value that they can offer Cousins but, make no mistake, they’re the ones who have to offer. Cousins has made it clear that he’s going to control his own future instead of allowing a team to lock it up so, now, the Redskins are essentially auditioning for his services instead of the other way around.
That’s what makes Allen’s statement so hard to explain. While claiming “high hopes” for the season and for a long-term deal in the future, Allen and the Redskins acted as if their bridges with Cousins had already been burned. If the decision to do so was made rashly, amid the heightened tensions of the last few days, it may be one they come to regret.
• Nora Princiotti can be reached at nprinciotti@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.