Quote: @Wetlander said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ purplefaithful said:
Are we really over-paying for KC (on a relative basis vs other qb's?) As much as RS has proven draft savvy in many ways, he couldn't draft a franchise qb if his life depended on it...
Mixon, Kamara and Cook? All gonna get paid.
I think most of the QB market is screwed up, if a QB cant take a team on his shoulders and carry inferior players he shouldnt be making what these QBs are making now. KC needs above average blocking and above average receivers coupled with a decent running game to play at his top level and that much level of required support should be devaluing him as well as most other QBs IMO. there are only a small handfull of QBs, working under a salary cap, that deserve the % of the cap that they get, and even saying that I think its likely time to take brady off that list. So maybe Rogers, Wilson, ??? a good not great QB whos contract handcuffs a team is a detriment to that team IMO.
Going down that line of thinking, most of the QBs aren't worth what they are getting paid. Wilson hasn't won a Super Bowl since he became a highly paid QB even though he has elevated some less talented teams to playoff contention. Same with Rodgers... One Super Bowl a decade ago when his salary wasn't consuming a large percentage of the cap.
Brady has consistently taken below market deals to allow the Patriots to put a good team around him. That's not the norm, in fact, it's the exception to the rule. Every other team has ponied up for their franchise guy or found a young QB on a rookie contract that gives them financial flexibility for a few years until they have to pay him.
Cousins contract definitely affects what we can do in terms of signing FAs, but what's the alternative? Hope we luck out and find a rookie QB that is actually good right away so we can capitalize on a 3-4 year window before we have to pay him more than Cousins? It's not a sustainable model... and then in 3-4 years our young QB is taking up a large percentage of our cap and we're back to having this same conversation...
IMO, if you have a good QB (don't need a great one) on a market rate contract, you just need to shift gears and draft well and look for bargains in FA. If you have a good young QB on a rookie deal, maybe it makes more sense to do what the Rams and Eagles have done where you sign some big FAs and work the trade machine to surround that QB with as much high end talent as you can get.
There is no perfect model... and you can't expect to win a Super Bowl by building a great team and signing cheap journeyman QBs like Keenum, Tyrod Taylor, Ryan Fitzpatrick, etc. every couple years. You need a good coaching staff, a good QB, a good core group of players, and some luck.
As they say, the only thing worse than overpaying a QB is not having a QB to overpay.
I think because QBs in the draft are such a crap shoot, the best thing to do is get one in free agency or via trade. Easier said than done, because QBs of Cousins stature rarely become available. We were lucky that he became available right when we needed one.
Quote: @Wetlander said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ purplefaithful said:
Are we really over-paying for KC (on a relative basis vs other qb's?) As much as RS has proven draft savvy in many ways, he couldn't draft a franchise qb if his life depended on it...
Mixon, Kamara and Cook? All gonna get paid.
I think most of the QB market is screwed up, if a QB cant take a team on his shoulders and carry inferior players he shouldnt be making what these QBs are making now. KC needs above average blocking and above average receivers coupled with a decent running game to play at his top level and that much level of required support should be devaluing him as well as most other QBs IMO. there are only a small handfull of QBs, working under a salary cap, that deserve the % of the cap that they get, and even saying that I think its likely time to take brady off that list. So maybe Rogers, Wilson, ??? a good not great QB whos contract handcuffs a team is a detriment to that team IMO.
Going down that line of thinking, most of the QBs aren't worth what they are getting paid. Wilson hasn't won a Super Bowl since he became a highly paid QB even though he has elevated some less talented teams to playoff contention. Same with Rodgers... One Super Bowl a decade ago when his salary wasn't consuming a large percentage of the cap.
Brady has consistently taken below market deals to allow the Patriots to put a good team around him. That's not the norm, in fact, it's the exception to the rule. Every other team has ponied up for their franchise guy or found a young QB on a rookie contract that gives them financial flexibility for a few years until they have to pay him.
Cousins contract definitely affects what we can do in terms of signing FAs, but what's the alternative? Hope we luck out and find a rookie QB that is actually good right away so we can capitalize on a 3-4 year window before we have to pay him more than Cousins? It's not a sustainable model... and then in 3-4 years our young QB is taking up a large percentage of our cap and we're back to having this same conversation...
IMO, if you have a good QB (don't need a great one) on a market rate contract, you just need to shift gears and draft well and look for bargains in FA. If you have a good young QB on a rookie deal, maybe it makes more sense to do what the Rams and Eagles have done where you sign some big FAs and work the trade machine to surround that QB with as much high end talent as you can get.
There is no perfect model... and you can't expect to win a Super Bowl by building a great team and signing cheap journeyman QBs like Keenum, Tyrod Taylor, Ryan Fitzpatrick, etc. every couple years. You need a good coaching staff, a good QB, a good core group of players, and some luck.
well the way they've been doing it for the last 40 years isnt getting it done either. the model of picking one high priced QB and building around him with whats left of the cap isnt getting it done for the Vikings or really any other team. Keep drafting QBs early and often IMO, this notion of not wanting quality competition at the QB spot IMO is a large reason that we are O for my life time in championship games in the salary cap era.
I would be interested to see (somebody else figure this up) where the superbowl QBs rank in % of total cap by team for the cap era. yes the cap keeps going up, but how much of that increase is going to QBs vs other positions? is the QB slice of the pie getting larger and are those teams seeing the rewards of that cap distribution or are they so scared of losing their "franchise" QB that they settle for good but not good enough?
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ Wetlander said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ purplefaithful said:
Are we really over-paying for KC (on a relative basis vs other qb's?) As much as RS has proven draft savvy in many ways, he couldn't draft a franchise qb if his life depended on it...
Mixon, Kamara and Cook? All gonna get paid.
I think most of the QB market is screwed up, if a QB cant take a team on his shoulders and carry inferior players he shouldnt be making what these QBs are making now. KC needs above average blocking and above average receivers coupled with a decent running game to play at his top level and that much level of required support should be devaluing him as well as most other QBs IMO. there are only a small handfull of QBs, working under a salary cap, that deserve the % of the cap that they get, and even saying that I think its likely time to take brady off that list. So maybe Rogers, Wilson, ??? a good not great QB whos contract handcuffs a team is a detriment to that team IMO.
Going down that line of thinking, most of the QBs aren't worth what they are getting paid. Wilson hasn't won a Super Bowl since he became a highly paid QB even though he has elevated some less talented teams to playoff contention. Same with Rodgers... One Super Bowl a decade ago when his salary wasn't consuming a large percentage of the cap.
Brady has consistently taken below market deals to allow the Patriots to put a good team around him. That's not the norm, in fact, it's the exception to the rule. Every other team has ponied up for their franchise guy or found a young QB on a rookie contract that gives them financial flexibility for a few years until they have to pay him.
Cousins contract definitely affects what we can do in terms of signing FAs, but what's the alternative? Hope we luck out and find a rookie QB that is actually good right away so we can capitalize on a 3-4 year window before we have to pay him more than Cousins? It's not a sustainable model... and then in 3-4 years our young QB is taking up a large percentage of our cap and we're back to having this same conversation...
IMO, if you have a good QB (don't need a great one) on a market rate contract, you just need to shift gears and draft well and look for bargains in FA. If you have a good young QB on a rookie deal, maybe it makes more sense to do what the Rams and Eagles have done where you sign some big FAs and work the trade machine to surround that QB with as much high end talent as you can get.
There is no perfect model... and you can't expect to win a Super Bowl by building a great team and signing cheap journeyman QBs like Keenum, Tyrod Taylor, Ryan Fitzpatrick, etc. every couple years. You need a good coaching staff, a good QB, a good core group of players, and some luck.
As they say, the only thing worse than overpaying a QB is not having a QB to overpay.
I think because QBs in the draft are such a crap shoot, the best thing to do is get one in free agency or via trade. Easier said than done, because QBs of Cousins stature rarely become available. We were lucky that he became available right when we needed one.
but like Wet says, how many of those high dollar QBs have teams that are built for the SB? throw out Brady as he was taking less to keep the Pats competitive, of the rest of the SB QBs the last decade or so since the rookie cap was instituted, it really seems like the teams with the moderately paid, younger quality QBs are better off than those the are paying their "franchise" QB money and cutting quality at other spots.
it will be interesting to see what happens to KC once they pay Mahomes, how much will that cripple the team they put around him?
Anyone else think that we've already seen the best of Jared Goff? I think the league has his number now.
Vikings reset the RB in 2011 with AD.
That same contract today, 9 years later is still up there.
9 years ago the salary cap was less, so it cost a greater % of the team Salary Cap.
Quote: @Mattyman said:
Vikings reset the RB in 2011 with AD.
That same contract today, 9 years later is still up there.
9 years ago the salary cap was less, so it cost a greater % of the team Salary Cap.
and the notion was at the time that it wouldnt hurt us since we werent paying market value for a QB, well now we are and the notion is still to pay top dollar to a RB.... the math doesnt work out when you factor in being able to pay more important guys, with potentially longer careers, like Harris, ONeill, and a few others that will be needing new deals soon.
Quote: @StickyBun said:
Anyone else think that we've already seen the best of Jared Goff? I think the league has his number now.
He wasn't as good as the media made him out to be during their run to the Super Bowl... It was Mcvay's offense and a strong running game that helped him be successful.
I can't remember who did the breakdown, but they basically said that the league figured out Mcvay's offense and the decline of Gurley and the Rams running game has hampered their offense.
Everything was predicated off of motion with Gurley in the backfield... they could do their jet sweep motion and either hand it off the to the WR, give it to Gurley, or play action pass off that same offensive look. Gave teams fits, but not anymore.
It shows these bright young offensive minds need to grow and adapt just like our crusty old school defensive guru. ;-)
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Mattyman said:
Vikings reset the RB in 2011 with AD.
That same contract today, 9 years later is still up there.
9 years ago the salary cap was less, so it cost a greater % of the team Salary Cap.
and the notion was at the time that it wouldnt hurt us since we werent paying market value for a QB, well now we are and the notion is still to pay top dollar to a RB.... the math doesnt work out when you factor in being able to pay more important guys, with potentially longer careers, like Harris, ONeill, and a few others that will be needing new deals soon.
I agree with you.
It's telling that from what I can tell, no one in this thread, even the people who are upbeat about a new contract for Dalvin are saying, "Yes! give him all the money! He's worth whatever it takes!"
The "supporters" of the deal seem to mostly be fans who are resigned to the fact that it's happening, so they may as well accept it and be happy. Rather than actually badly wanting the deal to occur. Just my read on the thread.
And again I'll add, Dalvin is a great player when healthy. But paying him big bucks scares me.
Quote: @StickyBun said:
Anyone else think that we've already seen the best of Jared Goff? I think the league has his number now.
SFVike said the Rams have 18? new starters since the Superbowl.
Add tape of Goff and I can see why Goff is gonna struggle.
Either way you want to slice it, the games Cook has missed will and should work against any high deal.
Any deal MUST include incentives based on games/snaps played. It is the only sensible thing the Vikings can do to protect themselves.
Melvin Gordon just got 8 mil per year. Derrick Henry got franchise tagged and will get 10.278 mil.
I am having a hard time seeing how Cook should get more than Henry.
I think an 8 to 9 mil per year deal (for only 2 years added to 2020) with hefty incentives for games/snaps played plus more for any awards, etc. is pretty fair.
|
