***Official 2021 Vikings***

[Neptune78]

What's your point? Because the plan to get Kirk Cousins didn't work, the Vikings should purposely tank and hope they become the first NFL team ever where that worked?

Never said the Vikes should tank.
Just pointing out that you had a long list of top QBs and how their team's got there, and that Cousins was not in the conversation.

 

[clone52]

Never said the Vikes should tank.
Just pointing out that you had a long list of top QBs and how their team's got there, and that Cousins was not in the conversation.

The list was intended to only include QBs drafted by the team the play for, to illustrate the ways in which a team can draft a franchise altering QB and that purposely tanking has rarely, if ever, worked.

I left off any QB that was acquired via trade or free agency. I did include a few that have left their main team (like Wentz and the Eagles) to further illustrate how the Eagles thought they got their franchise QB.

 

[Mr Janny]

I completely disagree with the idea of tanking. Name one situation where purposely ruining your team has worked out well for a team?

We might turn into the Jaguars who've drafted 3 QBs in the Top 10 in the last decade with nothing to show for it.

Look at the teams who have a Franchise QB.
The Chiefs didn't tank to get Mahomes.
The Packers didn't tank to get Rodgers.
The Seahawks didn't tank to get Wilson.
The Bills didn't tank to get Josh Allen.
The Ravens didn't tank to get Lamar Jackson.
The Cowboys didn't tank to get Josh Allen.
The Colts didn't tank to get Andrew Luck. Manning got hurt and they lucked out with a 1-15 season.
The Chargers didn't tank to get Justin Herbert.


The Bengals kind of tank, I guess, but its not like they gutted their roster. They just were on a continuous decline with a bad roster. The certainly didn't tank on purpose.

The Cardinals blew their first Top 10 pick to try and grab a franchise QB (Josh Rosen) and he was so bad they got a second chance. Again, not an on purpose tank.

It looks like the Raiders purposely to get Derek Carr. Terrell Pryor was their leading passer and I don't even recognize the name of their leading rusher and leading receiver. All that for a "franchise" QB with Kirk Cousins type success.

The Falcons didn't purposely tank to get Matt Ryan, unless you think the plan was to get Michael Vick indicted for an illegal dog fighting ring.

The Jaguars are great at tanking.

Let me clarify my position.

I don't think they should tank. I think Kirk Cousins, flawed as he may be, is still their best option at quarterback. I think the roster has talent, especially on the offensive side of the ball. I think there are players that need to be cut on the defensive side of the ball who are not worth their contract, and that's where most of the changes need to be made.
That's my preferred way forward.

But, if they do move off of Kirk, and sign some journeyman QB, making it clear their intention is to draft a quarterback in the first round in 2023, then having the highest pick possible gives them the best chance to select the quarterback that they evaluate as the best, without having to mortgage the future by trading up. That has worked (Mahomes) but there are plenty of examples of it not working.

Counting on the ability to draft a successful first round QB is an incredibly risky plan. Drafting a quality quarterback is far from a sure thing, even if you have the number 1 pick. But with that said, the higher your pick, the more options you give yourself. If you're sitting at 12, it's less likely that you will have the opportunity to draft the player you have the highest grade on, than if you were at 3. That's just math. Certainly there can be exceptions to that, and we've all seen talented quarterbacks fall in the draft, there's still zero guarantee that will happen.

And so, if the Vikings are determined to take a quarterback in the first round of 2023, and want to maximize their chances of being able to draft the one they evaluate as best, as risky of a proposition as that is, having the highest pick possible increases their odds of being able to do that.

To be clear, I don't think that they should do that, though.

 

[Neptune78]

Let me clarify my position.

I don't think they should tank. I think Kirk Cousins, flawed as he may be, is still their best option at quarterback. I think the roster has talent, especially on the offensive side of the ball. I think there are players that need to be cut on the defensive side of the ball who are not worth their contract, and that's where most of the changes need to be made.
That's my preferred way forward.

But, if they do move off of Kirk, and sign some journeyman QB, making it clear their intention is to draft a quarterback in the first round in 2023, then having the highest pick possible gives them the best chance to select the quarterback that they evaluate as the best, without having to mortgage the future by trading up. That has worked (Mahomes) but there are plenty of examples of it not working.

Counting on the ability to draft a successful first round QB is an incredibly risky plan. Drafting a quality quarterback is far from a sure thing, even if you have the number 1 pick. But with that said, the higher your pick, the more options you give yourself. If you're sitting at 12, it's less likely that you will have the opportunity to draft the player you have the highest grade on, than if you were at 3. That's just math. Certainly there can be exceptions to that, and we've all seen talented quarterbacks fall in the draft, there's still zero guarantee that will happen.

And so, if the Vikings are determined to take a quarterback in the first round of 2023, and want to maximize their chances of being able to draft the one they evaluate as best, as risky of a proposition as that is, having the highest pick possible increases their odds of being able to do that.

To be clear, I don't think that they should do that, though.

This could be exactly how KAM sees it too.

If the Vikes do extend (I hope not) the devil is in the details on how long for how much. History says Cousins will want at least three years for far more money than he's worth. And he's not getting any younger.

 

[clone52]

Let me clarify my position.

I don't think they should tank. I think Kirk Cousins, flawed as he may be, is still their best option at quarterback. I think the roster has talent, especially on the offensive side of the ball. I think there are players that need to be cut on the defensive side of the ball who are not worth their contract, and that's where most of the changes need to be made.
That's my preferred way forward.

But, if they do move off of Kirk, and sign some journeyman QB, making it clear their intention is to draft a quarterback in the first round in 2023, then having the highest pick possible gives them the best chance to select the quarterback that they evaluate as the best, without having to mortgage the future by trading up. That has worked (Mahomes) but there are plenty of examples of it not working.

Counting on the ability to draft a successful first round QB is an incredibly risky plan. Drafting a quality quarterback is far from a sure thing, even if you have the number 1 pick. But with that said, the higher your pick, the more options you give yourself. If you're sitting at 12, it's less likely that you will have the opportunity to draft the player you have the highest grade on, than if you were at 3. That's just math. Certainly there can be exceptions to that, and we've all seen talented quarterbacks fall in the draft, there's still zero guarantee that will happen.

And so, if the Vikings are determined to take a quarterback in the first round of 2023, and want to maximize their chances of being able to draft the one they evaluate as best, as risky of a proposition as that is, having the highest pick possible increases their odds of being able to do that.

To be clear, I don't think that they should do that, though.

Fair enough. If they get rid of Kirk, I agree that a higher pick improves their odds, but believe they should still try to put the best team possible out there that they can get.

 

[Kurttr]

My counter to this is that we still don't know much much of all of this is coaching. We know Zimmer has out his thumb on the offensive scale many times, we know their goal was not to design the offense around Cousins (it was around Cook), and we know Cousins has had a new offensive coordinator every single year he's spent in MN. Including next year, now. There has to be some kind of connection between stats and overall skills and tons of staff turnover do not aid any of this. How many successful offenses out there have a new OC every year?

As has been said many times, if you reasonably can let Cousins go, then do it -- but at that point, you're committed to a tank for a QB because all that's available out there for him is a massive downgrade everywhere except the checkbook. That's fine and more or less the type of thing you expect with a GM and HC overhaul, but it's still a serious commitment. It appears that "next guy up" is not currently on our roster and it'll take time to draft and develop that guy. Multiple years.

Cousins also played his first ~four years for the Redskins, who had a QB guru(?), Jay Gruden, and assts like McVey, Shanahan... and, the Redskins chose not to give Kirk big $. That says a lot. Can you think of any other QB who's original team let him walk after his 1st contract and who became a top QB? Kirk is who he is.

While I guess one could argue that Gruden stinks, as he's not been re-hired (to my memory), the O in MN has actually been designed to support Cousins - heavy run game with play-action. Now, the OL has stunk, no doubt, but Kirk makes any OL worse than they are due to being a zombie in the pocket.

I'll give you that the Vikes may be more likely to be worse next year if they get rid of Cousins. My perspective is that there's no sense wallowing longer in mediocrity, which is what's guaranteed with Cousins. I'd much rather start the quest to find a top QB, realizing there may be a down season or two along the way.

 

[Mr Janny]

Cousins also played his first ~four years for the Redskins, who had a QB guru(?), Jay Gruden, and assts like McVey, Shanahan... and, the Redskins chose not to give Kirk big $. That says a lot. Can you think of any other QB who's original team let him walk after his 1st contract and who became a top QB? Kirk is who he is.

While I guess one could argue that Gruden stinks, as he's not been re-hired (to my memory), the O in MN has actually been designed to support Cousins - heavy run game with play-action. Now, the OL has stunk, no doubt, but Kirk makes any OL worse than they are due to being a zombie in the pocket.

I'll give you that the Vikes may be more likely to be worse next year if they get rid of Cousins. My perspective is that there's no sense wallowing longer in mediocrity, which is what's guaranteed with Cousins. I'd much rather start the quest to find a top QB, realizing there may be a down season or two along the way.

That's kind of revisionist history. They didn't really let him walk. He played there two years after his 1st contract was done. They tagged him twice. They liked him enough to pay him $44 million over two years, which was on par with guys like Aaron Rodgers at the time. They tried to sign him to new contracts but couldn't agree. If they felt he was no good, they wouldn't have tagged him twice.

Also what evidence is there that Jay Gruden is anything resembling a quarterback guru? Andy Dalton, maybe?

 

[MeowingCows]

Cousins also played his first ~four years for the Redskins, who had a QB guru(?), Jay Gruden, and assts like McVey, Shanahan... and, the Redskins chose not to give Kirk big $. That says a lot. Can you think of any other QB who's original team let him walk after his 1st contract and who became a top QB? Kirk is who he is.

While I guess one could argue that Gruden stinks, as he's not been re-hired (to my memory), the O in MN has actually been designed to support Cousins - heavy run game with play-action. Now, the OL has stunk, no doubt, but Kirk makes any OL worse than they are due to being a zombie in the pocket.

I'll give you that the Vikes may be more likely to be worse next year if they get rid of Cousins. My perspective is that there's no sense wallowing longer in mediocrity, which is what's guaranteed with Cousins. I'd much rather start the quest to find a top QB, realizing there may be a down season or two along the way.

He didn't walk after his first contract, he got tagged. As for the offense, Kirk has a ton of arm talent -- extremely accurate, zippy, long range. We take that away from him by having s*** OLs and predicating hard on run game (which still was near the bottom of the league somehow...).

If there isn't a meaningful return for moving on from Cousins, it simply doesn't make sense to do it next season. They still take a massive cap hit by cutting him, and then have to sign someone else after to fill the spot (or draft...again). The only two logical options I see with him are keep him and let him walk post-contract, or he gets traded for something resembling a decent return (and even then the Vikings still eat a chunk of his cap hit, but not as much of one).

And unfortunately for him, he still takes the brunt of the blame for a team that had nearly the worst defense in the entire league repeatedly losing games in clutch situations, even with a ton of talent and money applied to it. That's what I can't wrap my head around, guys are out here telling us to watch the games and blame Cousins. Not blame the guys actually losing us the games. That's the defense, as an entire unit. A unit that's paid near top-10 in the league. I did watch the games, what I saw was constant defensive collapses practically any time the game was on the line.

 

[cytor]

Cousins has NOT been the problem with this team the last 2 years. The problem has been the defense ( or lack thereof) and Zimmer's pigheadedness. I'm not saying Cousins is a superbowl QB (he isn't), but if you gave him a good defense, he will win some playoff games.

I can say with high confidence that if Cousins was paid $20 million instead of $35 million, we would not be having this debate.

 

[Neptune78]

He didn't walk after his first contract, he got tagged. As for the offense, Kirk has a ton of arm talent -- extremely accurate, zippy, long range. We take that away from him by having s*** OLs and predicating hard on run game (which still was near the bottom of the league somehow...).

If there isn't a meaningful return for moving on from Cousins, it simply doesn't make sense to do it next season. They still take a massive cap hit by cutting him, and then have to sign someone else after to fill the spot (or draft...again). The only two logical options I see with him are keep him and let him walk post-contract, or he gets traded for something resembling a decent return (and even then the Vikings still eat a chunk of his cap hit, but not as much of one).

And unfortunately for him, he still takes the brunt of the blame for a team that had nearly the worst defense in the entire league repeatedly losing games in clutch situations, even with a ton of talent and money applied to it. That's what I can't wrap my head around, guys are out here telling us to watch the games and blame Cousins. Not blame the guys actually losing us the games. That's the defense, as an entire unit. A unit that's paid near top-10 in the league. I did watch the games, what I saw was constant defensive collapses practically any time the game was on the line.

At least the overpaid defense was on the field when the playoffs were on the line in GB.
Sure, Kirk is not the total blame for 7-9 records. And his huge guaranteed contract brought a lot of scrutiny. But sitting out in GB while he banks $millions/game was the straw for me with Cousins.

 

[cytor]

At least the overpaid defense was on the field when the playoffs were on the line in GB.
Sure, Kirk is not the total blame for 7-9 records. And his huge guaranteed contract brought a lot of scrutiny. But sitting out in GB while he banks $millions/game was the straw for me with Cousins.

Cousins did not get paid for sitting the GB game.... he was not vaxed. NFL players forgo the game check if not vaxed and had to sit out for testing positive.

 

[Neptune78]

Cousins did not get paid for sitting the GB game.... he was not vaxed. NFL players forgo the game check if not vaxed and had to sit out for testing positive.

From players union reports, covid positive players sitting out did get paid unless the game was canceled. My understanding is Cousins banked his ~ $2 million/game check.

 

[clone52]

Cousins also played his first ~four years for the Redskins, who had a QB guru(?), Jay Gruden, and assts like McVey, Shanahan... and, the Redskins chose not to give Kirk big $. That says a lot. Can you think of any other QB who's original team let him walk after his 1st contract and who became a top QB? Kirk is who he is.

While I guess one could argue that Gruden stinks, as he's not been re-hired (to my memory), the O in MN has actually been designed to support Cousins - heavy run game with play-action. Now, the OL has stunk, no doubt, but Kirk makes any OL worse than they are due to being a zombie in the pocket.

I'll give you that the Vikes may be more likely to be worse next year if they get rid of Cousins. My perspective is that there's no sense wallowing longer in mediocrity, which is what's guaranteed with Cousins. I'd much rather start the quest to find a top QB, realizing there may be a down season or two along the way.

To be fair, the Redskins franchise tagged him twice. So they didn't let him walk, but also didn't think enough of him to give him a long contract. Your overall point still stands.

 

[MeowingCows]

At least the overpaid defense was on the field when the playoffs were on the line in GB.
Sure, Kirk is not the total blame for 7-9 records. And his huge guaranteed contract brought a lot of scrutiny. But sitting out in GB while he banks $millions/game was the straw for me with Cousins.

I totally get the contract complaints. Completely. And that is the real motive to move on from him -- it's less of on-field performance and more of cost for said performance.

As for covid sitting out... that's a whole different can of worms, with GB's QB being the poster boy for all of them. It could be worse (and now, they want to move on from him, too!).

 

[cytor]

From players union reports, covid positive players sitting out did get paid unless the game was canceled. My understanding is Cousins banked his ~ $2 million/game check.

I'll take your word for it.... I was going off what the media was saying before the season started. Honestly I have not looked it up to verify.

 

[cyfan92]

Anything from this season?

That's all from the 2020 season.

My original picture was the last 24 games. Which included last season. Kirk has a career year and still lost more than they won.

 

[MeowingCows]

My original picture was the last 24 games. Which included last season. Kirk has a career year and still lost more than they won.

And most of those losses weren't on Kirk. Defense and Special Teams lost, what, 7 games on last-possession scenarios?

Vikings lost games scoring 25+ points. Tell me whose fault those losses are.

 

[Neptune78]

I totally get the contract complaints. Completely. And that is the real motive to move on from him -- it's less of on-field performance and more of cost for said performance.

As for covid sitting out... that's a whole different can of worms, with GB's QB being the poster boy for all of them. It could be worse (and now, they want to move on from him, too!).

Not a Rodgers home boy at all, but the Packers didn't lose any playoff standing with him out.
All the Vikings got for their $2 million/game supposed team leader sitting on the bench was the potential of a better draft pick.

 

[Kurttr]

Glad at least one of you noted that the technicality of Cousins being franchised didn't change my overall point re: the Redskins not wanting to commit the future to him. Geesh.

I've not suggested that he is the lone reason the Vikings underperformed. Much can be said about the D - was glad to see Zimmer finally being let go. But, again, because another part of the team stinks doesn't mean that Kirk rocks. I've made the points that I think clearly show him being average at best as an overall QB. For a few more objective considerations:

- Who was the Vikings competition for Cousins? It was the Jets. Really. A guy as good as some of you suggest should have been in higher demand. I don't blame the Vikings for giving it a shot - their other choices were Teddy (coming off freak knee injury) or Keenum (or other ho-hum FAs). I do blame the Vikings for re-upping him, when they had plenty of evidence on their own time to make the same call WAS did.

- If you were going to trade Kirk now, I assume you big Cousins fans think you could get at least a 1st-rounder and other high picks too, right? If he's that good... and, assume for this that his deal is restructured a bit to make it happen. I'd be surprised if any try to suggest high bids would come in for Kirk -- that would support my points as well. If you really think there would be high demand/offers for Kirk, then, more power to you. No need to carry on the discussion.

 

[cyfan92]

Cousins has NOT been the problem with this team the last 2 years. The problem has been the defense ( or lack thereof) and Zimmer's pigheadedness. I'm not saying Cousins is a superbowl QB (he isn't), but if you gave him a good defense, he will win some playoff games.

I can say with high confidence that if Cousins was paid $20 million instead of $35 million, we would not be having this debate.

But you have to evaluate Kirk relative to his contract. The NFC North has been a joke outside of Green Bay. Kirk was 1-5 against Chicago until last year. With Mitch Trabisky.... Cousins lost to the Lions this year.

He has no pocket awareness and his cap situation since the Redskins has severly limited the roster. Alomst EVERY elite QB restructures his contract to make it more team friendly.. Except Kirk. He is a HORRIFIC leader. Nothing to the press or fans since the coach and GM are fired.

I'd rather swing and miss on first round QB's in cheap contracts than be stuck in the range Minnesota is currently in.. Too good to tank, too bad to make a playoff run