Quote: @"StickyBun" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
@"Havoc1649" said:
If you don’t resign Kirk, you’d better get lucky or JJ is gone. He isn’t going to stick around with a very average “bridge” QB and a blown up roster. From a WR’s perspective he’s had filet mignon for his career and just got a taste of life without Cousins. I wouldn’t blame him one but for leaving. He wants that 2,000 yard season and he knows the guy he needs to get him there.
Cousins contract came in as being very reasonable compared to his peers last year. If he’s willing to do something similar this year, it’s a super easy decision bringing him back.
The salary cap is going up and the Vikings bit the bullet this past year and ate a ton of dead cap. They’re actually in good shape to get everything done this year. They can get Kirk, JJ, and Hunter all under contrac5 no problem.
JJ is under team control through 2025 with the franchise tag ( could even do it again in 26 I believe) , if we dont have the QB situation fixed by then, whats the point in keeping him around? honestly if we have a shit start to next year and it doesnt look like our bridge QB and QB pick is going to work out, trade him before the deadline and really blow the thing up. He can say all he wants about who is QB, but if the team offers him a good 3 or 4 year deal this offseason, he isnt likely to wait to find out who his QB will be. Its almost always about the money.
What's the point in having superstar players then? I mean, isn't that the point? Playmakers? I just don't get this mentality.
I was referencing a point 2 or 3 years from now, who knows if JJ will even still be a superstar at that point, lots of hard hits for him over the next 2 or 3 years. I dont see the point in superstars though when the rest of the team is shit, whats the point of having a guy that could be lifting a team to a SB, when he is alone in the effort. This rosters needs a shit load of help, some of which will come from the draft ( hopefully ) some could come from FA ( if we can quit doing underperforming contracts ), but it takes money and luck. JJ is a WR, before he can get the ball we need to have protection up front, a decent run game to keep defenses from over playing said super star, and a QB that is able to 1. deliver the ball accurately ( which KC does better than any in the league) but also one that can make plays off script as well as extend plays when things break down ( which we do not have ) I think the team continually drafting DBs and receivers instead of focusing on OL and DL is why the team has been mired in mediocrity. IMO the closer the guys are to ball at the snap, the more impact they can have on about any given play and need to have more focus placed on getting superstars at those positions.
Quote: @"JimmyinSD" said:
@"StickyBun" said:
@"CFIAvike" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
@"CFIAvike" said:
And if "placeholder" is all you want, then it might as well be Mullins. At least he knows the system and knows he's nothing more than a back up.
Because that's the skill level we're taking about here. NO ONE with starter skills is going to sign for less that starter money
you can find guys that are bottom tier starters that play for much less than what KC is likely to be getting. Baker Mayfield is expected to sign a deal for under 20 per year, why not go get Baker, even if its on a longer term at say 18 million per year, give him some trade protections, and then still go get your rookie. the team comes out millions ahead, has a much better back if the rookie wins out, and still has a QB that will put butts in the seats ( although I dont think that is a problem yet based on the resale market ticket prices ( even after Kirk went down )
That's what I want to see "lower tier starters" until we happen upon a QB in the draft. That's how you get 7-8 years of Sean Salisbury, Sage Rosenfels, Matt Cassel, Case Keenum, washed up Donovan McNabb, Gus Frerotte...
Sign me up dude....that's gonna be awesome
Sounds fun, doesn't it? And then the odds of a drafted QB not making it are higher than making it, so all of these hopes pinned to a new savior QB and it doesn't work? 10 years of garbage football.
As opposed to 2 or maybe 3 more years of KC and mediocrity, and then 10 years of garbage football? I don't see the upside to signing Kirk again or forcing rookies into action before they are ready without a solid backup plan that can at least keep fans interested. There will be lower tier starters, higher tier backups that will play for a contract that allows the team options and cap room to fix other needs.
Or we force a rookie into action to soon, create a David Carr scenario, and go back to the draft well in 25. I dont understand the desire to rush a kid into service before the coach thinks they are ready.
They have already had 12 years of garbage football in the 19 years the Wilfs have owned the team. Segment of the Fans think that they have been top tier in the league forever.
Quote: @"mgobluevikes" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
@"StickyBun" said:
@"CFIAvike" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
@"CFIAvike" said:
And if "placeholder" is all you want, then it might as well be Mullins. At least he knows the system and knows he's nothing more than a back up.
Because that's the skill level we're taking about here. NO ONE with starter skills is going to sign for less that starter money
you can find guys that are bottom tier starters that play for much less than what KC is likely to be getting. Baker Mayfield is expected to sign a deal for under 20 per year, why not go get Baker, even if its on a longer term at say 18 million per year, give him some trade protections, and then still go get your rookie. the team comes out millions ahead, has a much better back if the rookie wins out, and still has a QB that will put butts in the seats ( although I dont think that is a problem yet based on the resale market ticket prices ( even after Kirk went down )
That's what I want to see "lower tier starters" until we happen upon a QB in the draft. That's how you get 7-8 years of Sean Salisbury, Sage Rosenfels, Matt Cassel, Case Keenum, washed up Donovan McNabb, Gus Frerotte...
Sign me up dude....that's gonna be awesome
Sounds fun, doesn't it? And then the odds of a drafted QB not making it are higher than making it, so all of these hopes pinned to a new savior QB and it doesn't work? 10 years of garbage football.
As opposed to 2 or maybe 3 more years of KC and mediocrity, and then 10 years of garbage football? I don't see the upside to signing Kirk again or forcing rookies into action before they are ready without a solid backup plan that can at least keep fans interested. There will be lower tier starters, higher tier backups that will play for a contract that allows the team options and cap room to fix other needs.
Or we force a rookie into action to soon, create a David Carr scenario, and go back to the draft well in 25. I dont understand the desire to rush a kid into service before the coach thinks they are ready.
Who are we precluded from signing or drafting if we keep KC for 2 years at 30-35 million?
It's a historical certainty that this team won't sign more than 1 major FA in the offseason. As it stands, we can still sign FA depth players for both lines. We have the money and to sign JJ, DH. We can still draft our QBOTF, draft D-line, CB, RB, O-line. The savings of 10-15 million that you think you can get for signing a "high second tier QB", that will match KC's production is not only a myth, but would turn into a completely unnecessary, weekly kick to the sack, only if and until the QBOTF can play up to KC's level.
we will see when FA opens who we wont be able to sign if we are keeping Cousins. I dont know who will be available, but I know if we tie up an additional 30 to 35, on top of the 14.5 he is already costing us, there wont be much left to pay JJ, DH, or any of the other 15- 20 guys we will need to fill out the roster next year. We need improved depth at nearly every position, as well as upgrades at many starting spots. it may not be the 1 or 2 major FA acquisitions that we could make as much as the 5-7 mid tier guys that we need to improve our current starters. Hell all 3 of our interior OL spots could use help, as well as DTs, DEs, LB, CB, RB, ( although if we can fix the IOL, I think RB takes care of itself )
and matching KCs production isnt really necessary as the first pick and possibly several other picks will be involved in getting that QBOTF who should be taking over the starting spot by mid to late season, which again leaves relying on the draft as a bit of a sketchy plan to correct the team.
as far as kicks to the sack... how many games/seasons with KC at QB have ended with a kick to the testes? hes 35 years old, if you are cool with wasting more time watching him stand in the pocket taking sack after sack, thats your prerogative, but I am ready for a change, even if the results may not be better, but they just might be.
Quote: @"kmillard" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
@"StickyBun" said:
@"CFIAvike" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
@"CFIAvike" said:
And if "placeholder" is all you want, then it might as well be Mullins. At least he knows the system and knows he's nothing more than a back up.
Because that's the skill level we're taking about here. NO ONE with starter skills is going to sign for less that starter money
you can find guys that are bottom tier starters that play for much less than what KC is likely to be getting. Baker Mayfield is expected to sign a deal for under 20 per year, why not go get Baker, even if its on a longer term at say 18 million per year, give him some trade protections, and then still go get your rookie. the team comes out millions ahead, has a much better back if the rookie wins out, and still has a QB that will put butts in the seats ( although I dont think that is a problem yet based on the resale market ticket prices ( even after Kirk went down )
That's what I want to see "lower tier starters" until we happen upon a QB in the draft. That's how you get 7-8 years of Sean Salisbury, Sage Rosenfels, Matt Cassel, Case Keenum, washed up Donovan McNabb, Gus Frerotte...
Sign me up dude....that's gonna be awesome
Sounds fun, doesn't it? And then the odds of a drafted QB not making it are higher than making it, so all of these hopes pinned to a new savior QB and it doesn't work? 10 years of garbage football.
As opposed to 2 or maybe 3 more years of KC and mediocrity, and then 10 years of garbage football? I don't see the upside to signing Kirk again or forcing rookies into action before they are ready without a solid backup plan that can at least keep fans interested. There will be lower tier starters, higher tier backups that will play for a contract that allows the team options and cap room to fix other needs.
Or we force a rookie into action to soon, create a David Carr scenario, and go back to the draft well in 25. I dont understand the desire to rush a kid into service before the coach thinks they are ready.
They have already had 12 years of garbage football in the 19 years the Wilfs have owned the team. Segment of the Fans think that they have been top tier in the league forever.
I dont think 10 years of garbage football is necessarily the result, that was the previous posters assertion, I was playing off his post. I think if we have the right people in place, which many think we do... then we need to trust that they can identify a quality QB and go get him, if they cant find a guy and think KC is the best option then so be it, but then I have to wonder if we actually have the right people making those decisions. I dont expect the next superstar, but I think there is some pretty decent talent coming out this year and its time to get in that game and quit taking the table scraps.
Kirk Cousins is 50-37-1 as a starter for the Minnesota Vikings. He's not a .500 QB for the team. He also flourished under KOC's system and was on pace for the best year of his career before he tore his Achilles. Also, people act like this is 1994 when an Achilles tear means the end of the road.
All that being said, I'm not saying this isn't an opportunity to move away from Kirk....What I'm saying is Kirk Cousins is a MAJOR part of this franchise. He is a FACE of this franchise. He is vitally important in the leadership of this franchise on and off the field. And if the decision is made to move on, they best have a better plan than "lower-tier starter and a dart throw draft pick at QB". Because if that's the best they can do, they might as well not even play next year. NO ONE WILL GIVE TWO SQUIRTS OF PISS about "Sam Howell" and some degen mid tier rookie who will likely fail.
If they move on, the move MUST be a top tier franchise style rookie who can either start week one or be ready when Mullens gets booed out of Minneapolis by week 3. Anything less than that, you can kiss JJ, Addison, Hockenson, and any real fan interest goodbye.
Thems the breaks
Quote: @"CFIAvike" said:
Kirk Cousins is 50-37-1 as a starter for the Minnesota Vikings. He's not a .500 QB for the team. He also flourished under KOC's system and was on pace for the best year of his career before he tore his Achilles. Also, people act like this is 1994 when an Achilles tear means the end of the road.
All that being said, I'm not saying this isn't an opportunity to move away from Kirk....What I'm saying is Kirk Cousins is a MAJOR part of this franchise. He is a FACE of this franchise. He is vitally important in the leadership of this franchise on and off the field. And if the decision is made to move on, they best have a better plan than "lower-tier starter and a dart throw draft pick at QB". Because if that's the best they can do, they might as well not even play next year. NO ONE WILL GIVE TWO SQUIRTS OF PISS about "Sam Howell" and some degen mid tier rookie who will likely fail.
If they move on, the move MUST be a top tier franchise style rookie who can either start week one or be ready when Mullens gets booed out of Minneapolis by week 3. Anything less than that, you can kiss JJ, Addison, Hockenson, and any real fan interest goodbye.
Thems the breaks
So you are saying you are a bandwagon fan? You didn't stick with the team when they were in rebuild mode in years past? I'm willing to bet most on here still tuned in. Down years are part of the equation ever since free agency was invented, hell ever since the game was invented. It's just part of the cycle.
Imo kirks value is about 38 to 40 million, he is already costing just under 15, so we need to be looking at him for around 23 to 25 million of new money, and no can kicking, I would be fine with that.
Kirk says he is open to a hometown discount, but he has also said that its not about the money for him, he has plenty, but it is about what that number represents in terms of appreciation, so he is kind of talking out both sides of his mouth.
I'm not against keeping Kirk as the bridge QB, I am against screwing up the cap to do it and not being able to improve the team around him, especially the IOL and DL. We have to make major improvements in both of those areas sooner than later, especially the IOL so they are in place whenever we get a new young QB in there.
|
