Thanks, as always, for taking part in the mailbag. Keep those questions coming! E-mail me at mike.jones@washpost.com with the subject line, “Mailbag question” and we’ll do it all over again next Tuesday.

But first, the best of this week’s submissions:

Is there any chance at all Kirk Cousins and the Redskins work out a deal before the franchise tag deadline? At this point, what is the main benefit for him to sign a deal right now?

AD

– Steve Carter

No. From everything I have gathered in talking to people close to the situation on both sides, there is no reason to expect Kirk Cousins to sign a long-term deal before the March 1 franchise tag deadline. The Redskins certainly would love to do so and avoid having to commit roughly $24 million in fully-guaranteed money (all of which counts against the salary cap) to the quarterback. Yes, they’re high on Cousins, and a long-term deal would benefit them, because they would be able to structure the deal in a way where maybe only a part of that $24 million (maybe $20 million or so) is comprised of base salary money (which counts against the cap) and the rest is made up of bonus money. That would give the team more salary cap flexibility to pursue other free agents.

But it really makes no financial sense for Cousins to agree to a deal before the tag deadline. He guarantees himself $24 million and if he plays out the franchise tag without agreeing to a long-term deal, he likely hits free agency next year as one of the top quarterbacks on the market. The Redskins could have avoided this situation by making Cousins a solid offer last season, but they weren’t even willing to commit the type of money Houston gave the less-proven Brock Osweiler (four years, $72 million with $37 million guaranteed and an annual salary of $18 million) last year. Now, the Redskins will wind up having to pay Cousins at least $44 million in guaranteed money for last year and this year ($20 million franchise tag in 2016, and $24 million tag figure this year), and they face the high risk of losing him next year.

AD

AD

Cousins is sitting back and letting his agent, Mike McCartney, do his job, which is to get his client the best possible deal. Waiting until the free agency market is set and then negotiating on a deal ensures that McCartney does just that. So, again, no. Cousins is not expected to sign a deal in advance of the franchise tag deadline. It just makes no sense for him.

Tired of Cousins situation. What’s you’re take on it? And, am I wrong for feeling that Cousins enjoys being a Redskin?

– Scot Fortescue

I understand the fatigue. I’m tired of bugging sources every day for updates and answering questions about it and writing about it nonstop. My take is this is playing out exactly how it should, however. Even if Cousins wants to be here, this is how you play it.

AD

Some players never get a chance for a big contract. Some only get one shot. His agent’s job is to work to make sure that he gets his client the best contract possible. And, so, after the Redskins only made a halfhearted offer last year, he’s in no mood to do anything but get Cousins the fair market payday he deserves.

He’s looking at Josh Norman ($20 million), Trent Williams ($15 million), Ryan Kerrigan ($11.7 million) and then looking at other starting quarterbacks like Ryan Tannehill ($19.25 million), Matt Ryan ($20.75 million), Joe Flacco ($22 million), Andrew Luck ($24.59 million) and inflation and knows his client deserves to be paid like Washington’s top players, and comparably to quarterbacks around the league. And so, that means waiting this thing out, even if it means playing on the franchise tag a second year.

AD

Don’t believe the notion that the Redskins can’t fill out their roster adequately if they pay Cousins that $24 million franchise player tag salary. They’ve got around $64 million in salary cap space this year. Even after committing $24 million to Cousins – if they do – they still have a great deal of cap space to re-sign their own free agents, pay for draft picks and get some talented pieces.

AD

I think Cousins does like playing for Jay Gruden, and he does like his teammates. He has talked about the importance of continuity. But, I’m sure he has some intrigue about playing for guys like Kyle Shanahan and/or Sean McVay, who know him very well and have helped him achieve a good deal of success. Are there some hurt feelings over last year’s negotiations and the fact that ownership preferred a struggling Robert Griffin III over Cousins until Gruden and Scot McCloughan stood on the table to get the green light on the switch? Sure. All of this factors into the situation. I think if anyone was in Cousins’s position right now, they’d be playing it exactly like he is.

What is the rationale for teams and players not being able to negotiate further after the July 15th under the franchise tag?

AD

The reasons aren’t clear other than the league decided there should be a cut-off point and that teams should fulfill those franchise tag commitments rather than try to get out of them midseason. So, get a deal taken care before the season, or then wait until afterwards to negotiate. Now, why a team couldn’t negotiate with the understanding the new deal doesn’t kick in until after the season, I don’t know. And no one in the league or agent ranks could tell me why either. But, this rule was put in place in the 2006 collective bargaining agreement, and it’s been that way ever since.

AD

Media ranks Cousins as one of the top free agents, so there should be teams willing to trade for him. Media also believes that a third tag is almost undo-able. Therefore all parties sort of acknowledge that it will be Cousins’s last year in a Redskin uniform when he signs a non-exclusive franchise tag without a long term contract. If that is the case, it makes not much sense to sign Cousins without trading him. A one-year forced marriage results in no one’s happiness but only bitterness. Sign him, trade him, get some draft picks and move on. Do you think along this line? Thank you for taking my question.

– Dien Do, Great Falls, Va.

AD

It seems likely that the potential of a third franchise tag would ensure Cousins is not here next year, because the Redskins wouldn’t want to pay him $35 million a year — the cost of a third franchise tag and the likely starting point for negotiations. But, there is indeed another option for the Redskins to give themselves a chance of retaining Cousins in 2018. The transition tag. That ensures the Redskins would either pay Cousins roughly $28 million next year, or that they have the right to match any contract offer other teams would give him.

AD

If you’re the Redskins, this is the smart move. Let someone else set the price, and then make your decision. The only drawback is, if Cousins does leave because Washington deemed the price tag too steep to match, that team doesn’t have to give them any compensation. Washington would receive a compensatory third-round pick for losing Cousins. But that’s it. So, from that standpoint, it does make sense to tag and trade Cousins now to get two first-round picks, mandated by the rule unless the teams agree to some other comparable type of compensation (more like a first and a third). But, that also leaves the Redskins in a bit of a bind because of the uncertainty that would come with any quarterback that isn’t Cousins — particularly a just-drafted rookie.

Unless you’re extremely confident in Colt McCoy, who can indeed play in this league, but struggles with durability, or unless you love some other quarterback on the free agent market, you’re better off rolling with Cousins one more year and drafting another quarterback.

AD

Remember, Jay Gruden needs to keep winning to ensure this ship remains pointed in the right direction and earn a contract extension next offseason. Taking a big step back at quarterback puts this team closer towards having to blow this whole thing up again, and nobody wants that.

AD

How closely is Kirk Cousins’s fate and long term deal tied to Jay Gruden being the head coach beyond this year? I’ve heard a scenario where they do not sign Kirk to a long term deal until they decide whether or not to extend Gruden for additional years.

Basically if Gruden is fired after this year for some reason, the next coach gets to pick his QB be it Cousins or someone else.

– Noone From Tampa

They’re not exactly tied to each other. The Redskins aren’t trying to figure out Gruden so they can then decide on Cousins. Gruden’s future could, however play a factor in Cousins’s thought process, however.

AD

Cousins would likely have reservations about re-signing because of the unknown. Say the team struggles and Gruden gets fired. He would then be playing for some other coach and in a different offense, and there’s no guarantee the next coach would see Cousins as a fit for his system, regardless of what he says during the interview process. Remember, Gruden was hired to fix RGIII, but he wound up preferring Cousins or McCoy instead. So, uncertainty with Gruden does more to hurt the Redskins’ bargaining with Cousins, not the other way around as you may have heard.

AD

It’s highly unusual for a team to give a coach an extension with two years left on a deal, though, so don’t expect Washington to extend Gruden now to ease things in Cousins’s mind. Man, the more you think about it, you realize, it’s just an all around a sticky situation.

I want your opinion to this question. I’m sure there was drama in the Redskin organization during the George Allen and Joe Gibbs era however, maybe because of social media, the drama/dysfunction has exploded since Dan Snyder purchased the team. In the conversation: Treatment of an established NFL coach (Marty Schottenheimer), to Steve Spurrier and Jim Zorn; pursuing aging free agents; Snyder having his partners in crime ([Vinny] Cerrato and Bruce Allen); RGIII drama loaded three years; Kirk Cousins situation; and now, in my opinion, the worst example, the current treatment of Scot McCloughan. Allen not allowing [him] to speak at the Senior Bowl and Chris Cooley speculating Scot could be drinking again have to be related. I have given several examples (you can probably think of more). Some are more serious than others, but why is it a pattern? What role does the PR department play in this dysfunction? Will this organization ever again run like a well-oiled machine?

AD

– Bowen Carpenter

The soap opera never ends, does it? Some rumors are true, some are not. But there’s always something with this team.

I obviously didn’t cover the George Allen or Gibbs eras, but you’re right, media has changed, and so things leak more. Look, no football team is perfect, but some do a better job of keeping drama to a minimum. Winning helps a lot, and that’s something this team hasn’t had a lot of. And yeah, it’s no coincidence the culture here during the Dan Snyder era has featured more toxicity than tranquility.

Everything starts at the top. You don’t treat people well, then that trickles down. Far too many former employees (and not just coaches) have horror stories of how things run in Ashburn. And as far as the never ending rumors and leaks of negativity, unfortunately with this team, whenever the shortcomings/flat out failures, it’s the go-to move of the franchise brain trust to find someone to blame.