Redskins Not Considering Transition Tag For QB Kirk Cousins

The Redskins have several contractual options when it comes to quarterback Kirk Cousins‘ future with the organization. However, as NFL.com Ian Rapoport reports, they’re not considering one route. Rapoport writes that the Redskins believe the $28.8MM transition tag is “not considered a viable option.” Instead, the team will consider signing him to a $34.5MM franchise tag, signing him to a long-term contract, or letting him hit unrestricted free agency.

Kirk Cousins (vertical)As our own Zach Links noted back in July, the transition tag would always be a considerable risk. Several general managers believed that rival teams could offer Cousins a giant signing bonus, making it difficult for his incumbent team to match. As Zach also noted, “any club would have to pay an exorbitant amount to steal Cousins, but a bid that the Redskins don’t match wouldn’t entitle them to any compensation for his departure.” Ultimately, there’s little incentive to this particular route.

Regardless, as Rapoport writes, the Redskins decision will ultimately depend on Cousins play down the stretch. If the quarterback is able to single-handedly lead his team to a handful of wins over the final stretch of the season, the organization could easily justify him as their franchise quarterback. However, if Cousins continues to put up pedestrian numbers, it’d be tough to justify the $34.5MM franchise tag (which will be the third straight year the Redskins have slapped him with the tag). Cousins has been heating up as of late, and he’s completed 66.7-percent of his passes this season for 2,796 yards, 17 touchdowns, and five interceptions. However, the Redskins are an underwhelming 4-6.

It’ll still be some time before we get any clarity on the situation. The two sides aren’t allowed to negotiate until the end of the season, and Cousins’ camp will surely wait to see if the organization assigns him with the franchise tag. Ultimately, as Rapoport writes, the “choice is in Cousins’ hands.”

View Comments (3)