The 2018 Kirk Cousins Megathread

[Nozizaki]

47 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

Losing competitively and beating teams with losing records shouldn’t be the standard. When do we start beating teams that deserve to play in the playoffs, besides the Eagles or Cowboys, because both are more deserving of a top 15 pick. When do we win meaningful games to get to the playoffs, or when does Cousins for that matter? I realize that it’s not just a Kirk Cousins problem but at the same time, the same problem held him back in Washington. Cousins has a golden opportunity to lead the team to the playoffs with three difficult and meaningful games to close the year. We know the defense isn’t good as of late and Cook has slowed down significantly. It’s on the passing game to carry the team to the playoffs, let’s see if they are up to the challenge. I don’t think you can blame anyone who is skeptical that Cousins will deliver.

I'm gonna focus on this part of your post, because I do agree with the rest of your post. This isn't just a Kirk issue, it's a Vikings issue. But another part of the problem is the schedule: The Vikings have yet to play a team above .500 at home. Every game against playoff contenders (except the NFC East) has been on the road.

I know that most people don't like moral victories, but there are a lot of teams that have also struggled to win road games against good teams. Teams like the Packers and Patriots have gone on the road and been humiliated in multiple games, something the Vikings have only done in Chicago. Playing a team like Seattle, Kansas City and Green Bay down to the wire on the road does show you still belong in the playoffs. Heck, we just saw Houston have an emotional hangover from their win over the Patriots on SNF and come out flat and get blown out by the Broncos. The Vikings didn't fold in that same situation against the same team. I'm getting a little off topic, but I'm trying to contextualize this.

It's kind of poetic that the stiffest tests the Vikings will get at home come at the end of the season, it gives Kirk every opportunity to kill some of the narratives surrounding him. And if he doesn't then even I'll step back and let the media devour him, but I really do expect the Vikings to win 2 out of the next 3 and at least win 1 playoff game. And if Kirk can do that, I expect the front office to extend him.

[vikingsrule]

28 minutes ago, Nozizaki said:

I'm gonna focus on this part of your post, because I do agree with the rest of your post. This isn't just a Kirk issue, it's a Vikings issue. But another part of the problem is the schedule: The Vikings have yet to play a team above .500 at home. Every game against playoff contenders (except the NFC East) has been on the road.

I know that most people don't like moral victories, but there are a lot of teams that have also struggled to win road games against good teams. Teams like the Packers and Patriots have gone on the road and been humiliated in multiple games, something the Vikings have only done in Chicago. Playing a team like Seattle, Kansas City and Green Bay down to the wire on the road does show you still belong in the playoffs. Heck, we just saw Houston have an emotional hangover from their win over the Patriots on SNF and come out flat and get blown out by the Broncos. The Vikings didn't fold in that same situation against the same team. I'm getting a little off topic, but I'm trying to contextualize this.

It's kind of poetic that the stiffest tests the Vikings will get at home come at the end of the season, it gives Kirk every opportunity to kill some of the narratives surrounding him. And if he doesn't then even I'll step back and let the media devour him, but I really do expect the Vikings to win 2 out of the next 3 and at least win 1 playoff game. And if Kirk can do that, I expect the front office to extend him.

Those are all fine points. Winning on the road isn’t easy, and if the Vikes can’t figure out how to win on the road against good teams, they will be one and done in the playoffs as the likely 6th seed. If it’s an issue beyond Cousins, what is the fix? If it’s a culture problem, a new HC needs to be considered. If it’s not a culture problem, do we hold Cousins accountable? Just seems the Vikes for years have struggled with this, it seems fitting that they would add a QB who has also struggled with this. 

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

Those are all fine points. Winning on the road isn’t easy, and if the Vikes can’t figure out how to win on the road against good teams, they will be one and done in the playoffs as the likely 6th seed. If it’s an issue beyond Cousins, what is the fix? If it’s a culture problem, a new HC needs to be considered. If it’s not a culture problem, do we hold Cousins accountable? Just seems the Vikes for years have struggled with this, it seems fitting that they would add a QB who has also struggled with this. 

I still believe that QB needs to be judged on whether or not he leads the team to wins consistently, and makes the players around him better.  this year, Cousins, for the most part has done that.  I am really glad that he's been able to have a great 2019 so far.  But...(you knew it was coming) I will be happier if the Vikings go deep in the playoffs...AND are even better next year!  The problem with Cousins is that for his career, he's not been the guy that leads his teams to victory consistently, nor has he made the players around him better, until this year.  So, which is the aberration?  Who is the real QB Kirk Cousins?

I am really glad that he's playing as well as he is.  His improved play has made the offensive line look better than they probably are...heck, even Treadwell has been playing better.  We will see how far this team goes this year. Then we will see if Kirk can duplicate it next year.

[Cearbhall]

8 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said:

Then we will see if Kirk can duplicate it next year.

Come on, give the guy a chance. He has been looking really good lately. That doesn't mean you should expect him to be a world beater.

Expecting success two years in a row is unreasonable. This is a Zim led team; he doesn't do that.

Kirk would be wise to get his extension done after this year.

 

 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Cearbhall said:

Come on, give the guy a chance. He has been looking really good lately. That doesn't mean you should expect him to be a world beater.

Expecting success two years in a row is unreasonable. This is a Zim led team; he doesn't do that.

Kirk would be wise to get his extension done after this year.

 

 

Yep.  But, I think it would be wise for the Vikings to wait until next season.  He's under contract for another year.

[Cearbhall]

1 hour ago, Virginia Viking said:

Yep.  But, I think it would be wise for the Vikings to wait until next season.  He's under contract for another year.

I don't know about that. The team can realize some immediate cap relief in '20 by extending Cousins. Also, Cousins' price could get insanely high if they let him play his way to the free agent market. The franchise tag isn't much of an option for the Vikings to consider for Kirk Cousins.

The two options I would have been considering if I was running the show would be drafting a QB this year to replace Cousins and letting Cousins play out his deal (or trade him if that became an option) OR extending Cousins. I wouldn't be looking to sign him after he makes it to free agency nor would I be interested in getting to free agency that year without a known commodity.

Where things are at now I would lean heavily towards extending Cousins. We'll have to see how the rest of the year plays out but that is where I am at right now. That said, I do not hate the idea of getting a QB high in the draft and letting that QB learn behind Cousins for a year so I would be looking to hold off putting ink to paper until after the draft. Locking into Cousins before that doesn't offer a ton of benefit to the team so I would defer that decision. Sure, I did just mention cap dollars as a benefit of extending Cousins, but those are cap dollars that can be used to sign the draft class if that is the route they go.

[wcblack34]

There are only two options:

A) Draft QBOTF in the first or second round this year and let Cousins walk after next year; or

B) Sign him to an extension in the offseason.

 

If you wait to see how he plays next year before drafting a replacement, and he plays at his current level, he likely commands close to $40 million on the open market. We probably can't afford that and would then not have his replacement ready to go the following year. We'd have to start a rookie or sign a stop-gap that won't play as well.

This is the season we have to base the future of the franchise on. You either extend Kirk or draft his replacement. 

[PrplChilPill]

2 hours ago, vikingsrule said:

Those are all fine points. Winning on the road isn’t easy, and if the Vikes can’t figure out how to win on the road against good teams, they will be one and done in the playoffs as the likely 6th seed. If it’s an issue beyond Cousins, what is the fix? If it’s a culture problem, a new HC needs to be considered. If it’s not a culture problem, do we hold Cousins accountable? Just seems the Vikes for years have struggled with this, it seems fitting that they would add a QB who has also struggled with this. 

Not sure what more anyone wanted in Seattle. the offense certainly wasn't the problem there.......If the D is ok, they win that game.

[vikingsrule]

3 minutes ago, PrplChilPill said:

Not sure what more anyone wanted in Seattle. the offense certainly wasn't the problem there.......If the D is ok, they win that game.

The offense certainly didn’t help matters when Seattle put up 17 unanswered points. We know the defense isn’t good but why was the offense so flat for most of the second half? until a broken coverage on Treadwell, what successes did they have. We should expect the offense to be more productive if giving up 30+ points is the norm for this defense against playoff caliber teams. Otherwise, we’re getting bounced in the playoffs.

[JDBrocks]

42 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

The offense certainly didn’t help matters when Seattle put up 17 unanswered points. We know the defense isn’t good but why was the offense so flat for most of the second half? until a broken coverage on Treadwell, what successes did they have. We should expect the offense to be more productive if giving up 30+ points is the norm for this defense against playoff caliber teams. Otherwise, we’re getting bounced in the playoffs.

That’s only the second time they have given up 30 points. 10 of the 37 points were allowed because of a deflected int (missed dpi) at the MN 25, and a Cook fumble at the MN 22. The defense definitely needs to play better, but let’s not exaggerate either.

[vikingsrule]

5 minutes ago, JDBrocks said:

That’s only the second time they have given up 30 points. 10 of the 37 points were allowed because of a deflected int (missed dpi) at the MN 25, and a Cook fumble at the MN 22. The defense definitely needs to play better, but let’s not exaggerate either.

Do you feel SF or New Orleans can put up 30 on this defense? What about Seattle, if we face them again in the playoffs? I’m only confident in holding GB under 30 of the playoff teams, which should be the primary focus at this point. I don’t know if there is a simple fix, let’s just hope they get better. 

[Krauser]

3 hours ago, Cearbhall said:

Expecting success two years in a row is unreasonable. This is a Zim led team; he doesn't do that.

 

[Krauser]

1 hour ago, wcblack34 said:

This is the season we have to base the future of the franchise on. You either extend Kirk or draft his replacement. 

Cousins has been playing like a top 5 QB. He's in his prime, and has stayed healthy.

He gets extended unless the rest of the year goes very badly.

They can and should still draft a QB in the middle rounds for developmental purposes.

Edited December 13, 2019 by Krauser

[PrplChilPill]

1 hour ago, vikingsrule said:

The offense certainly didn’t help matters when Seattle put up 17 unanswered points. We know the defense isn’t good but why was the offense so flat for most of the second half? until a broken coverage on Treadwell, what successes did they have. We should expect the offense to be more productive if giving up 30+ points is the norm for this defense against playoff caliber teams. Otherwise, we’re getting bounced in the playoffs.

Who cares what order the score comes in? The offense was more than good that game, at least Kirk's part in it. As far as expecting the offense to put up 30+ points, on the road, against Seattle.....well....good luck with that. Not saying they won't need to, because I think they would need to, but that isn't Kirk's fault.

[wcblack34]

50 minutes ago, Krauser said:

Cousins has been playing like a top 5 QB. He's in his prime, and has stayed healthy.

He gets extended unless the rest of the year goes very badly.

They can and should still draft a QB in the middle rounds for developmental purposes.

I’d agree with all of that. However, I feel that a 3-7th round QB is being drafted as a cheap backup and not looked at as a guy who can be “the guy.” Obviously, some teams have hit in those rounds recently (Dak, Wilson), but I don’t think they look at it the same if Cousins is resigned.