Opinions will change depending on how good Hall and Dobbs do. If either of them perform at a high level it
makes it hard to justify Kirk having a big salary. If they both look more backupish or borderline
starter and Cousins achilles heals properly and he’s “normal Kirk” athletic-wise,
I think it just makes sense to keep bringing Kirk back for as short a
commitment as you can and keep trying to find the next guy until you do. I’m not a big fan of getting rid of a good
player, before you have his replacement, especially at QB. I think you can probably tell within a year or
two if a guy has a credible chance at being the guy as most top tier guys.
Quote: @medaille said:
Opinions will change depending on how good Hall and Dobbs do. If either of them perform at a high level it
makes it hard to justify Kirk having a big salary. If they both look more backupish or borderline
starter and Cousins achilles heals properly and he’s “normal Kirk” athletic-wise,
I think it just makes sense to keep bringing Kirk back for as short a
commitment as you can and keep trying to find the next guy until you do. I’m not a big fan of getting rid of a good
player, before you have his replacement, especially at QB. I think you can probably tell within a year or
two if a guy has a credible chance at being the guy as most top tier guys.
^^^
This, no way I want to give up a top 10 QB for a hope and a prayer...ESPECIALLY QB.
Quote: @purplefaithful said:
@ medaille said:
Opinions will change depending on how good Hall and Dobbs do. If either of them perform at a high level it
makes it hard to justify Kirk having a big salary. If they both look more backupish or borderline
starter and Cousins achilles heals properly and he’s “normal Kirk” athletic-wise,
I think it just makes sense to keep bringing Kirk back for as short a
commitment as you can and keep trying to find the next guy until you do. I’m not a big fan of getting rid of a good
player, before you have his replacement, especially at QB. I think you can probably tell within a year or
two if a guy has a credible chance at being the guy as most top tier guys.
^^^
This, no way I want to give up a top 10 QB for a hope and a prayer...ESPECIALLY QB.
But if this QB isn't going to win you a Super Bowl (Unless he takes a team friendly deal to build a stronger roster around him), why do you keep going to the well to end with mid to late first round picks.
Either Cousins takes a steep pay cut and we use $25M to add 2-3 more players (DE, DT, RB) where you have a complete roster where he can win OR you cut bait and use his $40M to upgrade 3 positions and roll with a younger QB.
This defense is missing a DE and DT who can create pressure away from being a top 5-8 defense in the league (12th now). This offense needs speed at RB and maybe a better RG (the two cheapest positions on the offense in the 21st century)
This roster isn't far off to being built for anyone to take reign. Give me a young guy with legs and options to grow
Quote: @Skodin said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ medaille said:
Opinions will change depending on how good Hall and Dobbs do. If either of them perform at a high level it
makes it hard to justify Kirk having a big salary. If they both look more backupish or borderline
starter and Cousins achilles heals properly and he’s “normal Kirk” athletic-wise,
I think it just makes sense to keep bringing Kirk back for as short a
commitment as you can and keep trying to find the next guy until you do. I’m not a big fan of getting rid of a good
player, before you have his replacement, especially at QB. I think you can probably tell within a year or
two if a guy has a credible chance at being the guy as most top tier guys.
^^^
This, no way I want to give up a top 10 QB for a hope and a prayer...ESPECIALLY QB.
But if this QB isn't going to win you a Super Bowl (Unless he takes a team friendly deal to build a stronger roster around him), why do you keep going to the well to end with mid to late first round picks.
Either Cousins takes a steep pay cut and we use $25M to add 2-3 more players (DE, DT, RB) where you have a complete roster where he can win OR you cut bait and use his $40M to upgrade 3 positions and roll with a younger QB.
This defense is missing a DE and DT who can create pressure away from being a top 5-8 defense in the league (12th now). This offense needs speed at RB and maybe a better RG (the two cheapest positions on the offense in the 21st century)
This roster isn't far off to being built for anyone to take reign. Give me a young guy with legs and options to grow
Why should, or why would a top couple QB take a big paycut?
Quote: @Skodin said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ medaille said:
Opinions will change depending on how good Hall and Dobbs do. If either of them perform at a high level it
makes it hard to justify Kirk having a big salary. If they both look more backupish or borderline
starter and Cousins achilles heals properly and he’s “normal Kirk” athletic-wise,
I think it just makes sense to keep bringing Kirk back for as short a
commitment as you can and keep trying to find the next guy until you do. I’m not a big fan of getting rid of a good
player, before you have his replacement, especially at QB. I think you can probably tell within a year or
two if a guy has a credible chance at being the guy as most top tier guys.
^^^
This, no way I want to give up a top 10 QB for a hope and a prayer...ESPECIALLY QB.
But if this QB isn't going to win you a Super Bowl (Unless he takes a team friendly deal to build a stronger roster around him), why do you keep going to the well to end with mid to late first round picks.
Either Cousins takes a steep pay cut and we use $25M to add 2-3 more players (DE, DT, RB) where you have a complete roster where he can win OR you cut bait and use his $40M to upgrade 3 positions and roll with a younger QB.
This defense is missing a DE and DT who can create pressure away from being a top 5-8 defense in the league (12th now). This offense needs speed at RB and maybe a better RG (the two cheapest positions on the offense in the 21st century)
This roster isn't far off to being built for anyone to take reign. Give me a young guy with legs and options to grow
I think you could also argue the
opposite, which is “Why would you spend $40M on players when you don’t have a
QB that can get you to a SB? Are you
just going to spend money for the sake of spending money even when your team is
not competitive? That’s the same problem
as spending money on a QB and not having the rest of the roster competent
enough to get to a SB”
I’m not opposed to cutting Kirk and replacing him with a QB
that is lower performing but a better value, because the overall team will be
better then. I am opposed to cutting
Kirk without having a competent starter on the roster and then having to go
find a competent starting QB. Maybe one
of the guys on our roster will prove themselves to be that guy, but as of now,
we’ve got a rookie and 2 career backups.
Quote: @AGRforever said:
@ Skodin said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ medaille said:
Opinions will change depending on how good Hall and Dobbs do. If either of them perform at a high level it
makes it hard to justify Kirk having a big salary. If they both look more backupish or borderline
starter and Cousins achilles heals properly and he’s “normal Kirk” athletic-wise,
I think it just makes sense to keep bringing Kirk back for as short a
commitment as you can and keep trying to find the next guy until you do. I’m not a big fan of getting rid of a good
player, before you have his replacement, especially at QB. I think you can probably tell within a year or
two if a guy has a credible chance at being the guy as most top tier guys.
^^^
This, no way I want to give up a top 10 QB for a hope and a prayer...ESPECIALLY QB.
But if this QB isn't going to win you a Super Bowl (Unless he takes a team friendly deal to build a stronger roster around him), why do you keep going to the well to end with mid to late first round picks.
Either Cousins takes a steep pay cut and we use $25M to add 2-3 more players (DE, DT, RB) where you have a complete roster where he can win OR you cut bait and use his $40M to upgrade 3 positions and roll with a younger QB.
This defense is missing a DE and DT who can create pressure away from being a top 5-8 defense in the league (12th now). This offense needs speed at RB and maybe a better RG (the two cheapest positions on the offense in the 21st century)
This roster isn't far off to being built for anyone to take reign. Give me a young guy with legs and options to grow
Why should, or why would a top couple QB take a big paycut?
Ask Tom Brady why he did year after year? What is worth to Kirk to stay in Minnesota? This franchise has been very supportive of Kirk and paid him handsomely for it. He's got $200M in the bank. How much more does he need? Take $15M more to move your family and live where?
Potentially Atlanta but where else? Denver, New York, New Orleans, NYJ, Cleveland, Arizona, all have big money tied into QBs. Houston, Carolina, Tennessee have their QB of the future.
Chicago? Going back to Washington? Maybe Pittsburgh?
I don't think Kirk has many realistic options now. This team needs leverage over Kirk and a team that makes a run with a back up/rookie QB has leverage. Get rid of this NTC and being held for ransom for good/not great results.
According to reports, both Cousins and the Vikings are "very receptive" to having Cousins return on an extension. Cousons relationship with KOC and the respect he has in the locker room are listed as huge factors in getting something done
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
According to reports, both Cousins and the Vikings are "very receptive" to having Cousins return on an extension. Cousons relationship with KOC and the respect he has in the locker room are listed as huge factors in getting something done
My own preference is this...
Unless Dobbs goes off like few of us can imagine, having KC on a team friendlier deal AND getting a QBOTF in the next draft seems optimal.
Best chance to win in 24 and let a younger guy curate a season or 2.
Quote: @medaille said:
Opinions will change depending on how good Hall and Dobbs do. If either of them perform at a high level it
makes it hard to justify Kirk having a big salary. If they both look more backupish or borderline
starter and Cousins achilles heals properly and he’s “normal Kirk” athletic-wise,
I think it just makes sense to keep bringing Kirk back for as short a
commitment as you can and keep trying to find the next guy until you do. I’m not a big fan of getting rid of a good
player, before you have his replacement, especially at QB. I think you can probably tell within a year or
two if a guy has a credible chance at being the guy as most top tier guys.
you are going to be forced to make that decision on Kirk before you know the status of his Achilles IMO. I think Kirks career mirrors Gannons in the respect that neither were that great in their "prime", until they hit that point where their increased experience overlapped with what their game was lacking and they hit a small window of good/great play. However, IIRC Gannon wasnt all that expensive for the Raiders so they had a pretty well rounded team around him, vs Kirk who is likely to demand as much as he can get and the roster around him will suffer, especially when we add in the contracts of JJ, Darrisaw, and a few other of the pending free agents, restricted free agents, or guys like Bynum coming off their 3rd year that you want to lock down before the ball is in their court.
IMO if Dobbs looks solid in the next couple games, I start trying to lock him up. If Kirk wants to stay and compete on a cheap deal, sign him as well. No "no trade clauses", go into next year with KC, Dobbs, on short term non guaranteed deals, Hall, and the best rookie we can target without getting stupid.
|
