Rapoport: It is ‘highly unlikely’ Washington trades Kirk Cousins

By David Bonilla Feb 28, 2017 at 4:37 PM •





Technically, the San Francisco 49ers could still discuss a trade for Cousins with Washington. The problem is that they would only be able to discuss compensation with Washington and would be unable to speak to Cousins or his agent to determine if a long-term contract could be accomplished prior to a trade. That lack of information creates a big problem for any team that is interested in Cousins.



Following the news of Cousins being franchised, Ian Rapoport of NFL Media



That gave the impression that Washington was dead set on keeping Cousins for the 2017 season, which makes sense considering Washington used the exclusive franchise tag and not the non-exclusive franchise tag. However, Rapoport changed his tune a bit later on Tuesday, admitting that the possibility of Cousins still being traded was "highly unlikely" and not necessarily out of the realm of possibility.



"They can trade him but the difference here is that Kirk Cousins doesn't control his own fate," Rapoport said on NFL Network. "If they gave him the non-exclusive tag, he could seek a deal. He could work out an extension. He could do all the legwork and simply have the Redskins sign off on the compensation. That is not the case here and it just seems unlikely – highly, highly unlikely – the Redskins would trade him somewhere and then just force the team to go into negotiations blind, not knowing whether or not he would take a long-term deal."



Host Dan Hellie added, "Maybe some backroom negotiations could be going on." Rapoport offered a casual shrug, possibly indicating that was at least a small (or very small) possibility.



Of course, as already mentioned, Washington would have to allow Cousins to speak to the 49ers to see if he'd be willing to work out a long-term contract with them and San Francisco would have to be fairly positive that they could pull that off as well. If they were going to do that anyway, then they probably would have just used the non-exclusive franchise tag and let Cousins speak to whom he wants. Either way, they would be compensated handsomely if the quarterback went elsewhere.







"Some would say Washington can't have it both ways," writes Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk. "On one hand, they don't want to pay Cousins franchise-quarterback money on a long-term deal. On the other hand, they want franchise-quarterback compensation for him in trade."



Unless Washington and Cousins agree on a long-term contract, the quarterback will be able to test free agency in 2018, when a team like the 49ers would be able to sign him without the need to give up draft picks as compensation. Of course, they will have to compete with any other quarterback-needy team that shows interest in Cousins.



Cousins will earn $23.94 million in 2017 playing for Washington under the franchise tag. In 2016, he made nearly $20 million in Washington playing under the tag. Obviously, Cousins would prefer a long-term deal that offers him as much guaranteed money as possible, and it doesn't appear to be in the future with Washington. On the other hand, the 49ers can afford to wait until 2018 if they choose to pursue Cousins anyway. Both head coach Kyle Shanahan and general manager John Lynch received six-year contracts and have been given the time needed to methodically rebuild the team's roster. Time is a luxury that the organization has. On Tuesday, the Washington Redskins placed the exclusive franchise tag on quarterback Kirk Cousins. Placing the exclusive franchise tag and not the non-exclusive version on Cousins means that the quarterback is not able to be part of negotiations in order to initiate a trade to another team. All negotiations must go through Washington.Technically, the San Francisco 49ers could still discuss a trade for Cousins with Washington. The problem is that they would only be able to discuss compensation with Washington and would be unable to speak to Cousins or his agent to determine if a long-term contract could be accomplished prior to a trade. That lack of information creates a big problem for any team that is interested in Cousins.Following the news of Cousins being franchised, Ian Rapoport of NFL Media reported that the quarterback would not be traded by Washington . "They decided that they're not going to trade him to the San Francisco 49ers," Rapoport said during an interview on NFL Network. "They decided that they're not going to trade him anywhere. He's going to be their quarterback for the next year and that is that."That gave the impression that Washington was dead set on keeping Cousins for the 2017 season, which makes sense considering Washington used the exclusive franchise tag and not the non-exclusive franchise tag. However, Rapoport changed his tune a bit later on Tuesday, admitting that the possibility of Cousins still being traded was "highly unlikely" and not necessarily out of the realm of possibility."They can trade him but the difference here is that Kirk Cousins doesn't control his own fate," Rapoport said on NFL Network. "If they gave him the non-exclusive tag, he could seek a deal. He could work out an extension. He could do all the legwork and simply have the Redskins sign off on the compensation. That is not the case here and it just seems unlikely – highly, highly unlikely – the Redskins would trade him somewhere and then just force the team to go into negotiations blind, not knowing whether or not he would take a long-term deal."Host Dan Hellie added, "Maybe some backroom negotiations could be going on." Rapoport offered a casual shrug, possibly indicating that was at least a small (or very small) possibility.Of course, as already mentioned, Washington would have to allow Cousins to speak to the 49ers to see if he'd be willing to work out a long-term contract with them and San Francisco would have to be fairly positive that they could pull that off as well. If they were going to do that anyway, then they probably would have just used the non-exclusive franchise tag and let Cousins speak to whom he wants. Either way, they would be compensated handsomely if the quarterback went elsewhere.A report by Pro Football Talk said that Washington would need to be "blown away" by an offer in order to even begin thinking about trading Cousins. The report stated that team president Bruce Allen is specifically thinking of what Washington gave up five years ago to get quarterback Robert Griffin III."Some would say Washington can't have it both ways," writes Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk. "On one hand, they don't want to pay Cousins franchise-quarterback money on a long-term deal. On the other hand, they want franchise-quarterback compensation for him in trade."Unless Washington and Cousins agree on a long-term contract, the quarterback will be able to test free agency in 2018, when a team like the 49ers would be able to sign him without the need to give up draft picks as compensation. Of course, they will have to compete with any other quarterback-needy team that shows interest in Cousins.Cousins will earn $23.94 million in 2017 playing for Washington under the franchise tag. In 2016, he made nearly $20 million in Washington playing under the tag. Obviously, Cousins would prefer a long-term deal that offers him as much guaranteed money as possible, and it doesn't appear to be in the future with Washington. On the other hand, the 49ers can afford to wait until 2018 if they choose to pursue Cousins anyway. Both head coach Kyle Shanahan and general manager John Lynch received six-year contracts and have been given the time needed to methodically rebuild the team's roster. Time is a luxury that the organization has.

More San Francisco 49ers News

Rapoport explains why 49ers may be built to overcome Super Bowl hangover

By David Bonilla Sep 8, 2020

As you've probably read by now, two of three Good Morning Football hosts — Kyle Brandt and Nate Burleson — predicted that the San Francisco 49ers would miss the playoffs this season. "That Super Bowl-loss hangover is real," Burleson explained as part of his reasoning. NFL insider Ian Rapoport isn't so sure. At least, not when it comes to the 49ers. He feels San Francisco may be uniquely built to overcome predictions of a decline. "I thought the Niners had kind of a really good offseason," Rapoport said on KNBR's Murph & Mac show Tuesday morning. "It wasn't like very exciting. The Trent Williams trade was exciting.

Rapoport discusses Jimmy Garoppolo's inconsistent performance during 49ers-Cardinals

By David Bonilla Sep 14, 2020

NFL insider Ian Rapoport seemed a little surprised to hear about Monday morning's local criticisms of quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo following the San Francisco 49ers' Week 1 loss to the Arizona Cardinals. "Is that what's going on this morning? Is it Jimmy G is terrible?" Rapoport asked on KNBR's Murph & Mac show Monday morning. While Garoppolo's numbers, at first glance, look comparable to his Cardinals counterpart, Kyler Murray, anyone who watched the game knows that the latter was the better quarterback on the football field at Levi's Stadium on Sunday. Much of that had to do with the nearly 100 rushing yards Murray had against the 49ers defense. You throw out his two kneel-downs to end the game, and he is right at the century mark. "I

49ers-Cardinals: Deebo Samuel misses another practice, making his availability for Sunday unlikely

By David Bonilla Sep 11, 2020

The San Francisco 49ers got one wide receiver back this week, as rookie Brandon Aiyuk returned to practice. It doesn't look like they will be as lucky with another injured wideout. Head coach Kyle Shanahan and general manager John Lynch were hopeful to have second-year receiver Deebo Samuel on the field with Aiyuk on Sunday. That now seems unlikely after Samuel wasn't out on the practice field with his teammates on Friday. He has not practiced with the team since suffering a Jones fracture in June. No Deebo