The 2018 Kirk Cousins Megathread

[PrplChilPill]

29 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

I just thought the Vikings had a better shot over the long haul re-signing Keenum and spending the extra 15-ish million per year to build around him.  I'm of the opinion that Super Bowl winners are made through having a cheap/rookie contract QB and building around them. 

When you look at the history of the Super Bowl, that's predominantly true.  The highest cap hit in NFL history at QB to win a Super Bowl was Steve Young at 13% of the Niners cap, and that was a year in which the Niners literally cheated the NFL salary cap and got punished for it. 

No other QB has ever won a Super Bowl while accounting for 12% or more of their team's cap space. 

You look at Super Bowl winning teams, and year after year after year it's a team with a cheap QB option and the rest of the money spread throughout the other 52 players on a roster. 

Granted, I think what we gave Rodgers was a mistake, too.  And that was BEFORE he had a crappy year this year.  I caught all kinds of hell for consistently demanding that the Packers either: Force Rodgers to play out the final two years of his contract, or trade him.  Every single time Rodgers makes a good play I get made fun of in the Packer subforum.  And I'm looking at our team going like... Rodgers is worth this? 

Just look at Super Bowl winners:

Eagles - QB on rookie deal, won with a backup.
Patriots - Brady criminally underpaid and was getting paid like 12 million that year.
Broncos - Manning's cap hit had dropped below 12% this year and he barely had anything to do with it.
Patriots - Brady criminally underpaid.
Seahawks - Wilson on rookie contract.
Ravens - Flacco on rookie deal.
Giants - Manning had a moderate QB contract.
Packers - Rodgers on rookie contract.
Saints - Brees towards the end of his first contract when the cap hit had gone down.
Steelers - Roethlisberger on rookie contract.
Giants - Manning on rookie contract. 
Colts - Manning was paid only 8 million this year.  It was a backloaded contract and Manning never won another with the Colts.
Steelers - Roethlisberger on rookie contract.
Patriots - Brady underpaid.
Patriots - Brady underpaid (possibly still on rookie contract?)
Buccaneers - Brad Johnson lol. 
Patriots - Brady on a 6th round rookie contract.
Ravens - Dilfer lol.

I just don't know how people can look at this history in NFL Super Bowls and think it takes a great QB.  The evidence, to me, is abundantly clear that the best mix of QB value and cap space is the best way to win. 

 

And where did you want the Vikings to get that rookie? Also, I think only looking at SB champions, and not the teams that made the championship games and SB is too narrow a focus. Manning, Brady, Roethlesberger, Rodgers are probably HoF QBs. Arguing that it doesn't take a great QB seems odd to me. Wilson? If he continues on this trajectory, he'll be joining them. Should the Seahwaks not re-sign him, and let him walk, because he's no longer cheap? 

[MacReady]

Just now, PrplChilPill said:

And where did you want the Vikings to get that rookie? Also, I think only looking at SB champions, and not the teams that made the championship games and SB is too narrow a focus. Manning, Brady, Roethlesberger, Rodgers are probably HoF QBs. Arguing that it doesn't take a great QB seems odd to me. Wilson? If he continues on this trajectory, he'll be joining them. Should the Seahwaks not re-sign him, and let him walk, because he's no longer cheap? 

I'm not saying it takes a rookie, I'm saying it takes good value at QB.  It's not a coincidence that all those great quarterbacks you mentioned have never won a Super Bowl while accounting for 13 or more percent of their team's cap.  Not saying it's impossible to win while paying a QB a high cap hit, but it's very difficult to. 

To your question, Vikings have had some pretty bad luck in available rookies.  They really haven't passed on anybody they should have taken for a long time.  I just think bottom line, if you've got a QB you go to the NFC Championship game with, I think you build on that. 

Keenum is 9 million cheaper this year, 8 million cheaper next year.  That 9 million is a solid starter out of free agency this year, solid starter out of free agency next year.  Is Cousins worth two solid starters over the next two years?  I'm not so sure.

Yeah, Keenum could have imploded, but the Vikings are in a prime position to rebuild if it all fails.  Youth everywhere.  Hunter, Diggs, Thielen, Rhodes, Smith...

I just don't like Cousins is all.  I think he's Brett Favre light.  Not as great, but just as expensive and just as prone to the untimely turnover. 

[Klomp]

2 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Keenum is 9 million cheaper this year, 8 million cheaper next year.  That 9 million is a solid starter out of free agency this year, solid starter out of free agency next year.  Is Cousins worth two solid starters over the next two years?  I'm not so sure.

Solid starters aren't signing 1-year deals usually. So it's only one solid starter.

[since72]

2 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

I just don't like Cousins is all. 

And this is clouding your posts.

I just like him.  That's probably clouding my posts.

But this is a forum to exchange OPINIONS.  You've stated yours.  Thank you for contributing to our diverse mix of views.

At least he's not Tarvaris Jackson Lite, or Christian Ponder Lite.  What do you care how expensive he is?  You're not paying his salary.  I'm sure every team has players that are making more than their value.  And players making less.

[Cearbhall]

34 minutes ago, PrplChilPill said:

And where did you want the Vikings to get that rookie?

A pretty good option would have been letting Shaun Hill play QB until he got injured instead of trading for Sam Bradford. After the Hill injury (he couldn't move well enough to survive behind that line) the team would have started Tyler Heinicke.

With the first round pick the next year the team could have selected Pat Mahomes' kid. Or they could have used the pick to improve the offensive line. 

Edited December 11, 2018 by Cearbhall

[SemperFeist]

Gotta love hindsight

[MacReady]

Just now, SemperFeist said:

Gotta love hindsight

To be fair, trading a first round pick for Sam Bradford shouldn't have required hindsight to tell you that was a big mistake. 

 

[swede700]

1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

To be fair, trading a first round pick for Sam Bradford shouldn't have required hindsight to tell you that was a big mistake. 

 

But, what option did they have?  Riding the season out with Shaun Hill?

[Cearbhall]

Just now, Outpost31 said:

To be fair, trading a first round pick for Sam Bradford shouldn't have required hindsight to tell you that was a big mistake. 

 

Correct. My disdain for that trade is not hindsight at all. I wrote my opinion about that trade the day of the trade. I could link to what I wrote at the time but I don't know that the rules on this forum allow such links.

As far as who I would have picked in the first round of the 2017 draft one could say that is hindsight. I don't know that I would have picked Mahomes. Maybe if would have been DeShaun Watson. I don't think it is entirely hindsight to think the team would have been looking for a QB.

1 minute ago, swede700 said:

But, what option did they have?  Riding the season out with Shaun Hill?

My opinion at the time was that Hill might be the least bad choice amongst a pile of no good choices. I believe I also wrote that I would have considered Vick. It doesn't really matter though. It could have been Scott Mitchell for all I care. The point was to not make a bad situation worse by sacrificing the future.

[SemperFeist]

4 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

To be fair, trading a first round pick for Sam Bradford shouldn't have required hindsight to tell you that was a big mistake. 

 

What were you going to do, fold the season? I’m sure that would have gone over well in the locker room. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, since72 said:

  Cautious optimism with Cousins was just that.  Nothing more.

Oh...I think there was a lot more than cautious optimism when it came to the signing of Cousins.  He was the missing piece...the difference maker...at least that's what I recall.  Expectations were pretty high and when I advised caution, that Cousins had some deficiencies in his game, I was pretty much told I was biased against him.

It will be interesting what results a new offensive coordinator might get from Kirk going forward.  Yet, Kirk is going to need a lot of help from a running game and more balanced play calling...not to mention a better offensive line. Cousins, in my opinion, will never be one to take over a game on the strength of his playing ability.

[swede700]

1 minute ago, Virginia Viking said:

Oh...I think there was a lot more than cautious optimism when it came to the signing of Cousins.  He was the missing piece...the difference maker...at least that's what I recall.  Expectations were pretty high and when I advised caution, that Cousins had some deficiencies in his game, I was pretty much told I was biased against him.

It will be interesting what results a new offensive coordinator might get from Kirk going forward.  Yet, Kirk is going to need a lot of help from a running game and more balanced play calling...not to mention a better offensive line. Cousins, in my opinion, will never be one to take over a game on the strength of his playing ability.

I personally only had cautious optimism.  I never thought he was the "missing piece", but I thought he was a better option than Keenum (since Bradford really was never in the discussion).  

[MacReady]

Just now, SemperFeist said:

What were you going to do, fold the season? I’m sure that would have gone over well in the locker room. 

Yes.  I think desperation trades to salvage a season are a great way to end up in purgatory.  The Packers could have gone out and gotten Kaepernick or some other QB to keep their hopes alive last year.  They didn't, and they ended up with the most promising rookie cornerback they have ever had in my time watching the Packers plus an additional first round pick in 2019. 

This is something that's not new for me.  I have ALWAYS put value on draft picks and draft capital.  I think it's huge.  It's why I think the Cowboys will regret in the long term that Cooper trade, why the Bears will regret in the long term that Mack trade, etc. 

Everything I stand by in my football belief centers around three principles:

Patience, draft capital and cap space. 

Cousins kills two of those.  Mack kills three of those. 

[SemperFeist]

1 minute ago, Virginia Viking said:

Oh...I think there was a lot more than cautious optimism when it came to the signing of Cousins.  He was the missing piece...the difference maker...at least that's what I recall.  Expectations were pretty high and when I advised caution, that Cousins had some deficiencies in his game, I was pretty much told I was biased against him.

It will be interesting what results a new offensive coordinator might get from Kirk going forward.  Yet, Kirk is going to need a lot of help from a running game and more balanced play calling...not to mention a better offensive line. Cousins, in my opinion, will never be one to take over a game on the strength of his playing ability.

No one ever said that Cousins was without his deficiencies. But this team was supposed to have what he needed to minimize those deficiencies. 

We saw a great offensive coach in Shurmur gameplan around Keenum’s deficiencies. DeFilippo was supposed to be another great offensive mind, who should have been able to do something similar. Instead, they’ve basically asked Cousins to be something that he’s not. 

Hopefully Stefanski can be more like Shurmur. 

[Uncle Buck]

2 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

Not trying to troll here and I wanted to wait until the morning, but I was just curious if minds are being changed on Cousins at all yet.  I remember bringing up in here his dismal record against winning teams with a few posters in here suggesting it was due more to the Redskins, but his record against .500 teams is now 4-24.  Really not trying to troll because I really don't have that rivalry type hatred for the Vikings like a lot of people do, just want to see if opinions are changing at all. 

 

There is no denying he had a bad game last night.  The thing is, he has had a lot of good games too.  I'm still just fine moving forward with him as our QB.  I posted early this morning that we just need to fix the offensive line and find a different OC.  It looks like Zim has already gotten onto my second point.  Haha. 

Cousins isn't going to be Tom Brady or Joe Montana.  He is what he is, which I believe is a top 10-12 QB in the league.  He isn't going to put the team on his shoulders and lead them to the promised land all by himself, but we have a good enough roster and coaching staff where he shouldn't need to do that.