Quote: @purplefaithful said:
You can win a SB with a QB the caliber of KC. You cant win a playoff game with a defense the caliber of the Vikings.
If you can win it all with Cousins, why is it that you don't?
Cousins isn't Mahomes, but Mahomes has lost a superbowl with a less than stellar performance a couple years ago.
This year's SB gives us a clue as to why even the best QB in the league might lose; especially in the second half come back by the Chiefs.
The Chiefs have 4 different offensive linemen since they lost their last SB which was what, only two years ago?
In the second half of this year's SB, the Eagles who had 4 defensive players with 10 sacks or more, didn't even sniff a sack of Mahomes who had a bad wheel!
Cousins has never had that O-line.
Why can the Chiefs build a championship O-line in two years and the Vikings can't do it in a decade?
Mainly due to the combination of player acquisition and the way the Vikings spend their money and draft capital.
In conclusion, Cousins can win it all, and the offense is the Vikings strength, but they still have deficits that prevent them from being a championship team. Perhaps with a top defense they could get there. But the defense is a mess with far more problems than the offense.
Is it time for a rebuild? Probably, but will they do it? No.
I wish Kwesi luck. He's in a tough spot.
Quote: @mgobluevikes said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Kentis said:
To me he is just Cousins Lite, we shall see…
A little more mobility, a little less arm talent, but I put them about the same level, good enough to beat the teams you should, but neither will elevate a team on their own and both will require quality around them to really compete.
I think its a good move for the raiders, he may not be easily replaced, but if the recipe isn't working, change the ingredients. You can tweak the recipe all you want, but its much more likely you are missing something.
I was all in on Carr coming out of college, learned to love Teddy, but Carr was definitely the better choice in the end. I really wish the Wilfs would get off the tweaking the recipe thought process and really commit to finding our future QB and then putting a dominant line in front of him and strong D on the other side. We dont need the highest paid QB in the league to win a SB, we need the best team.
While I agree we don't need the highest paid QB in the league, (and we don't), I think we take the opposite approach, meaning fix both lines and making them dominant before risk wrecking the QB of the future forcing him to learn behind a suspect line, a defense that leaves you behind the 8 ball, and receiving corps that will defect for greener pastures.
Unless you want to start Nick Mullins for a year, and tank the season, we aren't going to be in the position to draft a top QB prospect, and the likelihood of such a prospect actually panning out to a greater level than KC is low.
As for the Raiders, they're probably targeting Rodgers. If that's a good move is debatable.
So many GMs and coaches don't seem to grasp this simple concept.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ mgobluevikes said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Kentis said:
To me he is just Cousins Lite, we shall see…
A little more mobility, a little less arm talent, but I put them about the same level, good enough to beat the teams you should, but neither will elevate a team on their own and both will require quality around them to really compete.
I think its a good move for the raiders, he may not be easily replaced, but if the recipe isn't working, change the ingredients. You can tweak the recipe all you want, but its much more likely you are missing something.
I was all in on Carr coming out of college, learned to love Teddy, but Carr was definitely the better choice in the end. I really wish the Wilfs would get off the tweaking the recipe thought process and really commit to finding our future QB and then putting a dominant line in front of him and strong D on the other side. We dont need the highest paid QB in the league to win a SB, we need the best team.
While I agree we don't need the highest paid QB in the league, (and we don't), I think we take the opposite approach, meaning fix both lines and making them dominant before risk wrecking the QB of the future forcing him to learn behind a suspect line, a defense that leaves you behind the 8 ball, and receiving corps that will defect for greener pastures.
Unless you want to start Nick Mullins for a year, and tank the season, we aren't going to be in the position to draft a top QB prospect, and the likelihood of such a prospect actually panning out to a greater level than KC is low.
As for the Raiders, they're probably targeting Rodgers. If that's a good move is debatable.
So many GMs and coaches don't seem to grasp this simple concept.
or making sure they are comfortable in the offense before you expect them to run it and read defenses at that level. they get a new toy and they want to play with it right away. its not just the coaches and gms though, fans are so quick to clammor for the rookies and immediately declare them a bust if they arent starting week one.
Things I don’t agree with:
- “We
shouldn’t draft a QB we think could be elite because we aren’t ready.”
- “We
shouldn’t draft a QB we think could be elite because we already have a ‘Guy
we can win with.’”
- “We
should cut our QB before we find our next QB
Things I do agree with:
- If
you don’t have an elite QB, keep trying to get one. You need to draft a lot of QBs.
- When
you draft that potentially elite QB, you need to have the stuff in place
to maximize their potential and make sure not to ruin them because the
cupboards bare. I would say “Fuck
defense”, just make sure you have an OLine and Receiving Targets. Everything else you can get once you
find a guy.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ mgobluevikes said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ mgobluevikes said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Kentis said:
To me he is just Cousins Lite, we shall see…
A little more mobility, a little less arm talent, but I put them about the same level, good enough to beat the teams you should, but neither will elevate a team on their own and both will require quality around them to really compete.
I think its a good move for the raiders, he may not be easily replaced, but if the recipe isn't working, change the ingredients. You can tweak the recipe all you want, but its much more likely you are missing something.
I was all in on Carr coming out of college, learned to love Teddy, but Carr was definitely the better choice in the end. I really wish the Wilfs would get off the tweaking the recipe thought process and really commit to finding our future QB and then putting a dominant line in front of him and strong D on the other side. We dont need the highest paid QB in the league to win a SB, we need the best team.
While I agree we don't need the highest paid QB in the league, (and we don't), I think we take the opposite approach, meaning fix both lines and making them dominant before risk wrecking the QB of the future forcing him to learn behind a suspect line, a defense that leaves you behind the 8 ball, and receiving corps that will defect for greener pastures.
Unless you want to start Nick Mullins for a year, and tank the season, we aren't going to be in the position to draft a top QB prospect, and the likelihood of such a prospect actually panning out to a greater level than KC is low.
As for the Raiders, they're probably targeting Rodgers. If that's a good move is debatable.
I wouldnt start a rookie no matter who he is, we would need a bridge QB until the OL is up to par, but as long as KC is here they will be trying to be competitive and apparently that mean putting more emphasis on tweaking the team than really fixing the team... of course we are then back to the money issue. It would he interesting to see what they could put together if KC would actually put the team and winning ahead of his bank account. Him playing for 10m less a season won't mean shit to him in the future, but it might put some jewelry on his fingers and hardware in that empty old glass case of the Vikings.
We've been down this road before. There isn't an attainable vet out there (that is legit starter material) that is going to play for us below market value. Look at all the QB's making 10 mil less than KC. They are either garbage, or on rookie contracts.
And I told you before, I dont care if they aren't the same tier as KC, the primary goal of a rebuild year isn't to win the whole damn thing, or even care about winning the division, its about getting our cap healthy and refilling the talent cupboard with people that can get you there in a year or two. A bridge qb is just a guy to play to keep your rookie from getting David Carr'd imo.
We have kc for 1 more year and he's gone, or trade him now, get the cap savings now, and a pick or two now, and proceed to rebuild a team that maybe has a legit shot down the road...or don't and continue to have entertaining but ultimately disappointing seasons. I'm not saying rebuilding will necessarily lead to a Lombardi, but I've seen enough of top tier qb money for not top tier QB play to feel that we aren't getting there on this road.
...and then what? Option 1: You are either saying tank the year allowing us to pick 1-4 in the draft so you can get the closest thing to a sure thing QB 2-3 years down the road and losing every legit weapon on your team that has a career that wants to win now.
Or option 2: Be just significantly worse than now putting us in position to pick in the 7-11 range, build the O-line and defense, with the likelihood of drafting a QB along the lines of Blaine Gabbert, Blake Bortles, or Christian Ponder. Of course we could get lucky and land the next Brock Purdy/Tom Brady in rds. 6 or 7 if we want to play those odds.
I don't know who this bridge QB/sacrificial lamb is that wants the job badly enough to get David Carr'd to end his career. Thing is we can clear enough cap space to rebuild. Does it have to come at the expense of KC who has proven to be a damn good reliable QB which is a much tougher position to fill than any other position in football?
Cousins is about the 10th highest paid QB in the NFL. I believe Goff makes more. And right behind Cousins are Carson Wentz and Matt Ryan. There are better QBs making less than Cousins, but my bet is that they are on rookie deals. I'm not a huge fan of KC, but I don't hate him and I don't think he is terribly overpaid.
I do think that asking players to take less for the sake of the team is unreasonable. There are billionaires in the NFL, but they are not on the field.
This may be tinfoil hat territory but I am not so sure the Chiefs' O-Line was as good as we saw in the SB. I think the SB field was so bad that it neutralized Philly's pass rush. Also, Mahomes, even with a bad ankle, moves around in the pocket much better than Kirk.
And is it mandatory that we suffer through a miserable several years picking in the top 5 like the Bears and Detroit and Cleveland did in order to build a good team? Kansas City didn't suck when they drafted Mahomes. In fact, they had Alex Smith, a good QB and a number 1 overall pick, when they drafted Mahomes. Philly didn't spend years sucking to draft Hurts. They had Carson Wentz, also then a good QB and the overall number 2 pick, when they drafted Jalen Hurts.
And as for the Bears, Detroit, and Cleveland, after all those years of sucking and having just miserable teams and miserable fans, where are their Super Bowl rings? All they did was suck for years. No rings. No thanks.
Quote: @mgobluevikes said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ mgobluevikes said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ mgobluevikes said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Kentis said:
To me he is just Cousins Lite, we shall see…
A little more mobility, a little less arm talent, but I put them about the same level, good enough to beat the teams you should, but neither will elevate a team on their own and both will require quality around them to really compete.
I think its a good move for the raiders, he may not be easily replaced, but if the recipe isn't working, change the ingredients. You can tweak the recipe all you want, but its much more likely you are missing something.
I was all in on Carr coming out of college, learned to love Teddy, but Carr was definitely the better choice in the end. I really wish the Wilfs would get off the tweaking the recipe thought process and really commit to finding our future QB and then putting a dominant line in front of him and strong D on the other side. We dont need the highest paid QB in the league to win a SB, we need the best team.
While I agree we don't need the highest paid QB in the league, (and we don't), I think we take the opposite approach, meaning fix both lines and making them dominant before risk wrecking the QB of the future forcing him to learn behind a suspect line, a defense that leaves you behind the 8 ball, and receiving corps that will defect for greener pastures.
Unless you want to start Nick Mullins for a year, and tank the season, we aren't going to be in the position to draft a top QB prospect, and the likelihood of such a prospect actually panning out to a greater level than KC is low.
As for the Raiders, they're probably targeting Rodgers. If that's a good move is debatable.
I wouldnt start a rookie no matter who he is, we would need a bridge QB until the OL is up to par, but as long as KC is here they will be trying to be competitive and apparently that mean putting more emphasis on tweaking the team than really fixing the team... of course we are then back to the money issue. It would he interesting to see what they could put together if KC would actually put the team and winning ahead of his bank account. Him playing for 10m less a season won't mean shit to him in the future, but it might put some jewelry on his fingers and hardware in that empty old glass case of the Vikings.
We've been down this road before. There isn't an attainable vet out there (that is legit starter material) that is going to play for us below market value. Look at all the QB's making 10 mil less than KC. They are either garbage, or on rookie contracts.
And I told you before, I dont care if they aren't the same tier as KC, the primary goal of a rebuild year isn't to win the whole damn thing, or even care about winning the division, its about getting our cap healthy and refilling the talent cupboard with people that can get you there in a year or two. A bridge qb is just a guy to play to keep your rookie from getting David Carr'd imo.
We have kc for 1 more year and he's gone, or trade him now, get the cap savings now, and a pick or two now, and proceed to rebuild a team that maybe has a legit shot down the road...or don't and continue to have entertaining but ultimately disappointing seasons. I'm not saying rebuilding will necessarily lead to a Lombardi, but I've seen enough of top tier qb money for not top tier QB play to feel that we aren't getting there on this road.
...and then what? Option 1: You are either saying tank the year allowing us to pick 1-4 in the draft so you can get the closest thing to a sure thing QB 2-3 years down the road and losing every legit weapon on your team that has a career that wants to win now.
Or option 2: Be just significantly worse than now putting us in position to pick in the 7-11 range, build the O-line and defense, with the likelihood of drafting a QB along the lines of Blaine Gabbert, Blake Bortles, or Christian Ponder. Of course we could get lucky and land the next Brock Purdy/Tom Brady in rds. 6 or 7 if we want to play those odds.
I don't know who this bridge QB/sacrificial lamb is that wants the job badly enough to get David Carr'd to end his career. Thing is we can clear enough cap space to rebuild. Does it have to come at the expense of KC who has proven to be a damn good reliable QB which is a much tougher position to fill than any other position in football?
well KC isnt dead, and if he'd move his damn feet not only would the offensive line look better, the offense would likely be more effective at moving the chains the whole game.
you can finish the season in drafting in the teens and move up a lot easier than you can from the mid 20s and get a quality player, or have a better chance of having a quality player drop to you at 11. there are only 32 openings for a starting QB in the nfl, somebody would take the job i guarantee you that.
You can clear enough cap space, thats the same bull shit that we heard when it was about signing cousins not hurting the future cap or roster, ever since he came our ability to make quality free agent signings has been more difficult, and our cap situation has become more dire... sure if you want to gut some veterans like AT, Smith, or others, creating more holes, or push more cap hits into future years, go for it. I just dont see that as a prudent solution. If we had a top tier QB, and were only a player or two away from competing with the Eagles and Chiefs of the league, then maybe, but I dont see this team that close, despite the mirage of the 13-4 record.
and what legit weapons are we going to lose? JJ and Hock are all we have left and I'm fairly certain they are staying as long as they get paid, with or without KC.
you can be happy with the status quo if you want, I am not. I would offer KC an extension that lowers his average per season down to about 10-12% of the cap and if says no then I would put him on the market and start over. he isnt good enough to warrant a high % of the cap and still be able to put quality in front of him and on D.
We can want all we want, be it KC goes or KC stays, but the Wilfs want to be competitive all the time. The tear it down and rebuild hopes by some are just that, hopes.
I don’t believe the Wilf family will ever agree to go all in and suck for a couple of years in hopes it will be ok in year 3. They want to keep fan interest high. I can’t say I blame them, and it is their money. If someone doesn’t like that approach, jump on the Bears bandwagon today, because that’s where they are. Or, jump on the Chiefs bandwagon because they are already in a very good position to win it all again.
Quote: @Riphawkins said:
We can want all we want, be it KC goes or KC stays, but the Wilfs want to be competitive all the time. The tear it down and rebuild hopes by some are just that, hopes.
I don’t believe the Wilf family will ever agree to go all in and suck for a couple of years in hopes it will be ok in year 3. They want to keep fan interest high. I can’t say I blame them, and it is their money. If someone doesn’t like that approach, jump on the Bears bandwagon today, because that’s where they are. Or, jump on the Chiefs bandwagon because they are already in a very good position to win it all again.
seemed to work out pretty good for the chiefs didnt it? they had a good starter, but Reid knew that wasnt going to be good enough and even though the position was already filled he rolled he dice and drafted a QB early, and after 1 year he shipped his starter down the road. 5 years later, 3 SB appearances and 2 rings, not to mention they put together some damn good defensive talent in that same time period. I can pretty much promise they wouldnt have done any of that if they had stuck with Alex Smith because he was doing good enough to keep fan interest high.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ mgobluevikes said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ mgobluevikes said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ mgobluevikes said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Kentis said:
To me he is just Cousins Lite, we shall see…
A little more mobility, a little less arm talent, but I put them about the same level, good enough to beat the teams you should, but neither will elevate a team on their own and both will require quality around them to really compete.
I think its a good move for the raiders, he may not be easily replaced, but if the recipe isn't working, change the ingredients. You can tweak the recipe all you want, but its much more likely you are missing something.
I was all in on Carr coming out of college, learned to love Teddy, but Carr was definitely the better choice in the end. I really wish the Wilfs would get off the tweaking the recipe thought process and really commit to finding our future QB and then putting a dominant line in front of him and strong D on the other side. We dont need the highest paid QB in the league to win a SB, we need the best team.
While I agree we don't need the highest paid QB in the league, (and we don't), I think we take the opposite approach, meaning fix both lines and making them dominant before risk wrecking the QB of the future forcing him to learn behind a suspect line, a defense that leaves you behind the 8 ball, and receiving corps that will defect for greener pastures.
Unless you want to start Nick Mullins for a year, and tank the season, we aren't going to be in the position to draft a top QB prospect, and the likelihood of such a prospect actually panning out to a greater level than KC is low.
As for the Raiders, they're probably targeting Rodgers. If that's a good move is debatable.
I wouldnt start a rookie no matter who he is, we would need a bridge QB until the OL is up to par, but as long as KC is here they will be trying to be competitive and apparently that mean putting more emphasis on tweaking the team than really fixing the team... of course we are then back to the money issue. It would he interesting to see what they could put together if KC would actually put the team and winning ahead of his bank account. Him playing for 10m less a season won't mean shit to him in the future, but it might put some jewelry on his fingers and hardware in that empty old glass case of the Vikings.
We've been down this road before. There isn't an attainable vet out there (that is legit starter material) that is going to play for us below market value. Look at all the QB's making 10 mil less than KC. They are either garbage, or on rookie contracts.
And I told you before, I dont care if they aren't the same tier as KC, the primary goal of a rebuild year isn't to win the whole damn thing, or even care about winning the division, its about getting our cap healthy and refilling the talent cupboard with people that can get you there in a year or two. A bridge qb is just a guy to play to keep your rookie from getting David Carr'd imo.
We have kc for 1 more year and he's gone, or trade him now, get the cap savings now, and a pick or two now, and proceed to rebuild a team that maybe has a legit shot down the road...or don't and continue to have entertaining but ultimately disappointing seasons. I'm not saying rebuilding will necessarily lead to a Lombardi, but I've seen enough of top tier qb money for not top tier QB play to feel that we aren't getting there on this road.
...and then what? Option 1: You are either saying tank the year allowing us to pick 1-4 in the draft so you can get the closest thing to a sure thing QB 2-3 years down the road and losing every legit weapon on your team that has a career that wants to win now.
Or option 2: Be just significantly worse than now putting us in position to pick in the 7-11 range, build the O-line and defense, with the likelihood of drafting a QB along the lines of Blaine Gabbert, Blake Bortles, or Christian Ponder. Of course we could get lucky and land the next Brock Purdy/Tom Brady in rds. 6 or 7 if we want to play those odds.
I don't know who this bridge QB/sacrificial lamb is that wants the job badly enough to get David Carr'd to end his career. Thing is we can clear enough cap space to rebuild. Does it have to come at the expense of KC who has proven to be a damn good reliable QB which is a much tougher position to fill than any other position in football?
well KC isnt dead, and if he'd move his damn feet not only would the offensive line look better, the offense would likely be more effective at moving the chains the whole game.
you can finish the season in drafting in the teens and move up a lot easier than you can from the mid 20s and get a quality player, or have a better chance of having a quality player drop to you at 11. there are only 32 openings for a starting QB in the nfl, somebody would take the job i guarantee you that.
You can clear enough cap space, thats the same bull shit that we heard when it was about signing cousins not hurting the future cap or roster, ever since he came our ability to make quality free agent signings has been more difficult, and our cap situation has become more dire... sure if you want to gut some veterans like AT, Smith, or others, creating more holes, or push more cap hits into future years, go for it. I just dont see that as a prudent solution. If we had a top tier QB, and were only a player or two away from competing with the Eagles and Chiefs of the league, then maybe, but I dont see this team that close, despite the mirage of the 13-4 record.
and what legit weapons are we going to lose? JJ and Hock are all we have left and I'm fairly certain they are staying as long as they get paid, with or without KC.
you can be happy with the status quo if you want, I am not. I would offer KC an extension that lowers his average per season down to about 10-12% of the cap and if says no then I would put him on the market and start over. he isnt good enough to warrant a high % of the cap and still be able to put quality in front of him and on D.
If you think ZS, Harry, Danielle or anyone on the defensive side of the ball for that matter are sacred cows I got nothin for ya. To me there's not one of them over there that isn't infinitely more easily replaceable than KC. Creating more holes, isn't that's what the rebuild is about? PP, Z Smith, Harry, Kendricks, AT, all over 30 and declining production/value. There's not anybody on that D in particular that is untouchable for the right trade value or release.
You take MVP WRs and suddenly their production goes in the crapper because the ball is being thrown at their feet for a couple years, and they'll find a way out of that. We've seen it done how many times?
Now if you want to trade KC for Matt Stafford type compensation which included a starting QB, two 1sts and a 3rd, it might be worth a look, but that almost never happens.
|
