Quote: @CFIAvike said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Zanary said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Who's to say Cousins even comes back as the same player, even with advancements in medicine? That's his plant achillies he blew out and any instability leads to less zip on throws and the body potentially compensating leading to other injuries. He's 36 and that's not the kind of injury you want for those very reasons. The injury and the age muddies the waters even more on wether we had any intention on bringing him back anyway. I wouldn't do anything outside of an incentive laden one year deal, with a team option for a second year. It's just such a huge roll of the dice to get into "guarantees" and big money deals (which you know he wants) when talking about a guy like Cousins and the circumstances surrounding that signing.
I'm not so certain that Russell Wilson wouldn't be the better bet on a short term deal
OK, a couple of things:
1. Kirk has been one of the most robust players in the league, especially at his position. I have to believe he's attacking his rehab (now with stem cells, apparently) the way he maintained his endurance. He's likely going to want more than a year, and as he's rated as the top or among the top free agents and was leading the NFL in TD passes when injured...he has some ammo on his side. That said, he hasn't pushed to reset the league max since his initial deal, and I don't see him pushing for Burrows/Herbert money now.
2. On that topic...Wilson DOES want serious money, his own office, his own training staff, his...well, it's all about him, him, him at this point, and he's shown less endurance than Cousins, while also arguably looking "cooked" as opposed to "having a career year" which was the case for Kirk up to the Achilles "pop".
I get all that and all things being equal I'd rather have Cousins back. Unfortunately not all things are equal and you have to factor in the injury, when will he be back, and how much will this hinder him as a 36 year old player going forward? Does he become more susceptible to injury with the body compensating and his offseason workouts being different than normal? All that's possible and factors in when talking about contract length and amount. That's where this all gets sticky. If the Vikings give him anything more than a "prove it" one year deal, they better have assurances, protect themselves, and not let Kirk dictate terms as he's done in the past...otherwise they are fools and would be better off letting Kirk make some other organization take that risk
Exactly what does Kirk have to “prove”? This narrative that at “36 years of age he’s too old to recover” is complete BS. It’s a convenient excuse to move on from a QB that “costs too much” or “crumbles under pressure” or whatever reason people say as to why Cousins shouldn’t be the QB.
Look, he’s going to heal. He’s in far better shape than 99 percent of people 10 years younger than he is. He has access to literally world class medical and training staff. He is as tough as they come. And last i checked, the Achilles injury didn’t affect his brain or his arm.
Anyone that wants to say “he needs to sign a cheap deal below market value because he got hurt” is only setting themselves up to rip him for being “greedy” for signing for what he’s worth. Look, if you wanna sit there and say Kirk isn’t worth the money because you don’t think he’s good enough, fine. Just don't use the injury as a scapegoat.
People on here are googling “recovery time for an Achilles” and are quoting 12-18 months. When that’s the average time for fat lazy assholes like us who tear our Achilles stepping off the curb wrong.
It’s funny….Aaron Rodgers is 40, smokes weed and does Ayahuaska. Yet literally NO ONE is debating whether or not HE’S coming back from the same injury.
When is the last time a quarterback in his mid-30's made a successful recovery from a blown out achillies? I'm seeing one, Dan Marino in 1993, who even then Dan was 32. Nobody cares about Aaron Rodgers on if or when he comes back.
The risk has always been quarterbacks (most) are at the end of their careers when they get into their 30's and their play can fall off a cliff at any point ala Matt Ryan, and you just don't know when that is. That's issue number #1 because Cousins is right there. Issue #2 is the injury and if there are any long term effects on his play or does he now become a guy susceptible to injury? I mean nobody touched him when he blew out the achillies. Does that now become a concern? These are the reasons the Vikings would be fools to lock themselves in on anything other than a short term deal where they protect themselves financially.
Quote: @CFIAvike said:
People on here are googling “recovery time for an Achilles” and are quoting 12-18 months. When that’s the average time for fat lazy assholes like us who tear our Achilles stepping off the curb wrong.
The 12-18 month recovery time has nothing to do with fat or lazy. It is simply old data.
In the past, the treatment was surgery and then a period of resting before beginning rehab.
The new standard of care is to begin rehab shortly after surgery. This has led to shorter recovery times with better functional outcomes.
BTW, the narrative that Rodgers was going to be playing football in 4 months was a pipe dream.
Quote: @jargomcfargo said:
@ CFIAvike said:
People on here are googling “recovery time for an Achilles” and are quoting 12-18 months. When that’s the average time for fat lazy assholes like us who tear our Achilles stepping off the curb wrong.
The 12-18 month recovery time has nothing to do with fat or lazy. It is simply old data.
In the past, the treatment was surgery and then a period of resting before beginning rehab.
The new standard of care is to begin rehab shortly after surgery. This has led to shorter recovery times with better functional outcomes.
BTW, the narrative that Rodgers was going to be playing football in 4 months was a pipe dream.
Actually the articles I have read said recovery to get back to professional athlete status in 12 - 18 months with a likelihood of never getting back to the level. Our own Akers is a case study we can observe. He came back the fastest, I think like 6/7 months and ended up playing like poop. Then he is let go and ends up with us and gets injured again. He will go down as one of the many that never come back even 90%. Now some will say the position matters (RB vs a statue QB) which it might, but Kirk is still going to be affected by that injury no matter what. He is so deliberate in his throwing motion and that will change. Plus Kirk is 36 not 30...big difference in terms of recovery and also our teams investment.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ Zanary said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Who's to say Cousins even comes back as the same player, even with advancements in medicine? That's his plant achillies he blew out and any instability leads to less zip on throws and the body potentially compensating leading to other injuries. He's 36 and that's not the kind of injury you want for those very reasons. The injury and the age muddies the waters even more on wether we had any intention on bringing him back anyway. I wouldn't do anything outside of an incentive laden one year deal, with a team option for a second year. It's just such a huge roll of the dice to get into "guarantees" and big money deals (which you know he wants) when talking about a guy like Cousins and the circumstances surrounding that signing.
I'm not so certain that Russell Wilson wouldn't be the better bet on a short term deal
OK, a couple of things:
1. Kirk has been one of the most robust players in the league, especially at his position. I have to believe he's attacking his rehab (now with stem cells, apparently) the way he maintained his endurance. He's likely going to want more than a year, and as he's rated as the top or among the top free agents and was leading the NFL in TD passes when injured...he has some ammo on his side. That said, he hasn't pushed to reset the league max since his initial deal, and I don't see him pushing for Burrows/Herbert money now.
2. On that topic...Wilson DOES want serious money, his own office, his own training staff, his...well, it's all about him, him, him at this point, and he's shown less endurance than Cousins, while also arguably looking "cooked" as opposed to "having a career year" which was the case for Kirk up to the Achilles "pop".
The thing that gets lost in all this is that Cousins, if he returns, will be entering year 3 in the same offense. I think continuity is by far the most underrated factor in football...at every position, but especially QB.
Many were excited to see what Cousins might do returning to the same offense and same OC for the first time in 7 seasons. Don't discount that. It's a big factor. Alex Smith had 5 different OCs in five seasons. Give him the same offense, he went to the Pro Bowl and led the NFL in passer rating. Tom Brady wasn't some robo QB. But he ran the same offense for a decade. Even took it with him to Tampa. That is a huge advantage.
Cousins was having his best season in year two. His play was ridiculous. Nobody wants to see what year three might look like? I sure as hell do.
I don't think there's any doubt that a fully healthy Kirk in 2024 will run the offense more effectively than any other QB we could get for the upcoming season.
Quote: @JR44 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Many were excited to see what Cousins might do returning to the same offense and same OC for the first time in 7 seasons. Don't discount that. It's a big factor. Alex Smith had 5 different OCs in five seasons. Give him the same offense, he went to the Pro Bowl and led the NFL in passer rating. Tom Brady wasn't some robo QB. But he ran the same offense for a decade. Even took it with him to Tampa. That is a huge advantage.
Cousins was having his best season in year two. His play was ridiculous. Nobody wants to see what year three might look like? I sure as hell do.
The thing I always remember about the Chiefs and Smith is that they were kind of like us at the time, playoff contender, just couldn't get over the top and it was the bold move they made to move past Smith and move up in the draft and take Mahomes that completely altered the course of their franchise. I would rate Cousins ahead of Smith and I would not mind seeing him back, but I also feel with a deep QB class this year and us picking higher than usual, that this is the year to take that shot.
Dude, I've been saying that for two years. Yes, draft the QB. Sell the farm and move up if you have to. All for it. But the difference between KC and us is that they had Alex Smith when they drafted Mahomes. The ideal is to have a moderately competent starting guy under contract when you draft your QB. A guy to learn from and develop under, or fall back on if you need to. See Green Bay.
If he busts, OK, you took your shot and fall back on the vet. Vikings don't have that. Complicating matters is that we have what is probably the NFL's best WR/WR/TE combo. I'd really hate to see those weapons wilt on the vine if the guy we draft is another Josh Rosen or Zach Wilson or Trey Lance or...
Quote: @minny65 said:
@ jargomcfargo said:
@ CFIAvike said:
People on here are googling “recovery time for an Achilles” and are quoting 12-18 months. When that’s the average time for fat lazy assholes like us who tear our Achilles stepping off the curb wrong.
The 12-18 month recovery time has nothing to do with fat or lazy. It is simply old data.
In the past, the treatment was surgery and then a period of resting before beginning rehab.
The new standard of care is to begin rehab shortly after surgery. This has led to shorter recovery times with better functional outcomes.
BTW, the narrative that Rodgers was going to be playing football in 4 months was a pipe dream.
Actually the articles I have read said recovery to get back to professional athlete status in 12 - 18 months with a likelihood of never getting back to the level. Our own Akers is a case study we can observe. He came back the fastest, I think like 6/7 months and ended up playing like poop. Then he is let go and ends up with us and gets injured again. He will go down as one of the many that never come back even 90%. Now some will say the position matters (RB vs a statue QB) which it might, but Kirk is still going to be affected by that injury no matter what. He is so deliberate in his throwing motion and that will change. Plus Kirk is 36 not 30...big difference in terms of recovery and also our teams investment.
Yeah, I read that article you posted. It was very nearly journalistic malpractice to not even mention that position plays a bit part in recovery time.
No, I don't think Cousins achilles will be healthy enough to play CB, RB or WR in September. It's why I'm not expecting Cam Akers to be ready. But I think it's more likely a pocket QB will be able to play QB by then.
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
@ CFIAvike said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Zanary said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Who's to say Cousins even comes back as the same player, even with advancements in medicine? That's his plant achillies he blew out and any instability leads to less zip on throws and the body potentially compensating leading to other injuries. He's 36 and that's not the kind of injury you want for those very reasons. The injury and the age muddies the waters even more on wether we had any intention on bringing him back anyway. I wouldn't do anything outside of an incentive laden one year deal, with a team option for a second year. It's just such a huge roll of the dice to get into "guarantees" and big money deals (which you know he wants) when talking about a guy like Cousins and the circumstances surrounding that signing.
I'm not so certain that Russell Wilson wouldn't be the better bet on a short term deal
OK, a couple of things:
1. Kirk has been one of the most robust players in the league, especially at his position. I have to believe he's attacking his rehab (now with stem cells, apparently) the way he maintained his endurance. He's likely going to want more than a year, and as he's rated as the top or among the top free agents and was leading the NFL in TD passes when injured...he has some ammo on his side. That said, he hasn't pushed to reset the league max since his initial deal, and I don't see him pushing for Burrows/Herbert money now.
2. On that topic...Wilson DOES want serious money, his own office, his own training staff, his...well, it's all about him, him, him at this point, and he's shown less endurance than Cousins, while also arguably looking "cooked" as opposed to "having a career year" which was the case for Kirk up to the Achilles "pop".
I get all that and all things being equal I'd rather have Cousins back. Unfortunately not all things are equal and you have to factor in the injury, when will he be back, and how much will this hinder him as a 36 year old player going forward? Does he become more susceptible to injury with the body compensating and his offseason workouts being different than normal? All that's possible and factors in when talking about contract length and amount. That's where this all gets sticky. If the Vikings give him anything more than a "prove it" one year deal, they better have assurances, protect themselves, and not let Kirk dictate terms as he's done in the past...otherwise they are fools and would be better off letting Kirk make some other organization take that risk
Exactly what does Kirk have to “prove”? This narrative that at “36 years of age he’s too old to recover” is complete BS. It’s a convenient excuse to move on from a QB that “costs too much” or “crumbles under pressure” or whatever reason people say as to why Cousins shouldn’t be the QB.
Look, he’s going to heal. He’s in far better shape than 99 percent of people 10 years younger than he is. He has access to literally world class medical and training staff. He is as tough as they come. And last i checked, the Achilles injury didn’t affect his brain or his arm.
Anyone that wants to say “he needs to sign a cheap deal below market value because he got hurt” is only setting themselves up to rip him for being “greedy” for signing for what he’s worth. Look, if you wanna sit there and say Kirk isn’t worth the money because you don’t think he’s good enough, fine. Just don't use the injury as a scapegoat.
People on here are googling “recovery time for an Achilles” and are quoting 12-18 months. When that’s the average time for fat lazy assholes like us who tear our Achilles stepping off the curb wrong.
It’s funny….Aaron Rodgers is 40, smokes weed and does Ayahuaska. Yet literally NO ONE is debating whether or not HE’S coming back from the same injury.
When is the last time a quarterback in his mid-30's made a successful recovery from a blown out achillies? I'm seeing one, Dan Marino in 1993, who even then Dan was 32. Nobody cares about Aaron Rodgers on if or when he comes back.
The risk has always been quarterbacks (most) are at the end of their careers when they get into their 30's and their play can fall off a cliff at any point ala Matt Ryan, and you just don't know when that is. That's issue number #1 because Cousins is right there. Issue #2 is the injury and if there are any long term effects on his play or does he now become a guy susceptible to injury? I mean nobody touched him when he blew out the achillies. Does that now become a concern? These are the reasons the Vikings would be fools to lock themselves in on anything other than a short term deal where they protect themselves financially.
First of all, the list of NFL QB's that have torn their Achilles in their 30's in the last 30 years is Marino, Rodgers, and Cousins. Don't act like there's a graveyard of careers for Quarterbacks in their 30's who couldn't recover from an achilles tear. Again I'm going to side with modern medicine, world class athletic training, and someone in top physical condition to bounce back.
Secondly, what on Earth leads you to believe that Cousins' play is ready to fall off a cliff. In fact, this year his play was ASCENDING until the injury...dude was on pace for 5000 yards and 40+ TDs. Shit, Joe Flacco rolled off the couch at 39 years old and made the Browns a playoff contender after their season was all but sunk.
Look, I'm not advocating for a 5 year deal here, but a 2-3 year deal that gives the team time to find a successor while legitimately being able to be a playoff contender is the smartest thing for the team. And do so at a market fair price. You can't possibly tell me that Cousins isn't a better QB than any of the 4 QBs remaining in the NFC last week. Without the injury I honestly believe we'd have been a playoff team and likely competing this weekend. Kirk Cousins is PLENTY good enough for us to win a chip....period. And contrary to the naysayers, nothing about any of his contracts have stopped us from putting a championship team together. Poor/mediocre drafting and other personnel whiffs have WAY more to do with the team's lack of success than Kirk Cousins or any of his contracts.
Why do you think there are a list of teams hoping he hits the FA market? Why do you think he sits atop multiple lists as potentially the top free agent available? And the funniest thing is, he WANTS to play here...he'd rather NOT uproot his family. Yet there is a segment of fans who can't wait to see him run out of town. INSANE
Quote: @CFIAvike said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ CFIAvike said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Zanary said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Who's to say Cousins even comes back as the same player, even with advancements in medicine? That's his plant achillies he blew out and any instability leads to less zip on throws and the body potentially compensating leading to other injuries. He's 36 and that's not the kind of injury you want for those very reasons. The injury and the age muddies the waters even more on wether we had any intention on bringing him back anyway. I wouldn't do anything outside of an incentive laden one year deal, with a team option for a second year. It's just such a huge roll of the dice to get into "guarantees" and big money deals (which you know he wants) when talking about a guy like Cousins and the circumstances surrounding that signing.
I'm not so certain that Russell Wilson wouldn't be the better bet on a short term deal
OK, a couple of things:
1. Kirk has been one of the most robust players in the league, especially at his position. I have to believe he's attacking his rehab (now with stem cells, apparently) the way he maintained his endurance. He's likely going to want more than a year, and as he's rated as the top or among the top free agents and was leading the NFL in TD passes when injured...he has some ammo on his side. That said, he hasn't pushed to reset the league max since his initial deal, and I don't see him pushing for Burrows/Herbert money now.
2. On that topic...Wilson DOES want serious money, his own office, his own training staff, his...well, it's all about him, him, him at this point, and he's shown less endurance than Cousins, while also arguably looking "cooked" as opposed to "having a career year" which was the case for Kirk up to the Achilles "pop"
First of all, the list of NFL QB's that have torn their Achilles in their 30's in the last 30 years is Marino, Rodgers, and Cousins. Don't act like there's a graveyard of careers for Quarterbacks in their 30's who couldn't recover from an achilles tear. Again I'm going to side with modern medicine, world class athletic training, and someone in top physical condition to bounce back.
Secondly, what on Earth leads you to believe that Cousins' play is ready to fall off a cliff. In fact, this year his play was ASCENDING until the injury...dude was on pace for 5000 yards and 40+ TDs. Shit, Joe Flacco rolled off the couch at 39 years old and made the Browns a playoff contender after their season was all but sunk.
Look, I'm not advocating for a 5 year deal here, but a 2-3 year deal that gives the team time to find a successor while legitimately being able to be a playoff contender is the smartest thing for the team. And do so at a market fair price. You can't possibly tell me that Cousins isn't a better QB than any of the 4 QBs remaining in the NFC last week. Without the injury I honestly believe we'd have been a playoff team and likely competing this weekend. Kirk Cousins is PLENTY good enough for us to win a chip....period. And contrary to the naysayers, nothing about any of his contracts have stopped us from putting a championship team together. Poor/mediocre drafting and other personnel whiffs have WAY more to do with the team's lack of success than Kirk Cousins or any of his contracts.
Why do you think there are a list of teams hoping he hits the FA market? Why do you think he sits atop multiple lists as potentially the top free agent available? And the funniest thing is, he WANTS to play here...he'd rather NOT uproot his family. Yet there is a segment of fans who can't wait to see him run out of town. INSANE
First of all, the Vikings have been wanting to move off the Cousins contract for a couple years now. There's zero disputing that, it's been widely reported, and it's the reason he wasn't signed to an extension prior to this season and why the team decided to let him play the season out. Now he's another year older and coming off a major non contact injury. You can believe in modern medicine all you want, but signing him carries some risk to it on a couple different levels. I like Kirk, but you have to be a realist regarding the situation and not tie ourselves into another large contracts where he and his agent dictate terms. If some other team wants to play ball with him and roll the dice on that kind of deal....good luck to them. At some point the Vikings HAVE TO turn the page at quarterback
Quote:
Nix plays in a gadget offense that's designed to mask his weaknesses (ala throwing to anyone other than his first read). Bo Nix has Marcus Mariota written all over him.
He's similar to Mariota physically , but mentally Nix is way ahead of him.
Nix has better mechanics and fundamentals than MM.
Nix set the NCAA record for pass completion percentage @ 77.4%
And the "Gadget Offense" take doesn't fit .
https://duckswire.usatoday.com/2022/04/0...n-offense/
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
@ CFIAvike said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ CFIAvike said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Zanary said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Who's to say Cousins even comes back as the same player, even with advancements in medicine? That's his plant achillies he blew out and any instability leads to less zip on throws and the body potentially compensating leading to other injuries. He's 36 and that's not the kind of injury you want for those very reasons. The injury and the age muddies the waters even more on wether we had any intention on bringing him back anyway. I wouldn't do anything outside of an incentive laden one year deal, with a team option for a second year. It's just such a huge roll of the dice to get into "guarantees" and big money deals (which you know he wants) when talking about a guy like Cousins and the circumstances surrounding that signing.
I'm not so certain that Russell Wilson wouldn't be the better bet on a short term deal
OK, a couple of things:
1. Kirk has been one of the most robust players in the league, especially at his position. I have to believe he's attacking his rehab (now with stem cells, apparently) the way he maintained his endurance. He's likely going to want more than a year, and as he's rated as the top or among the top free agents and was leading the NFL in TD passes when injured...he has some ammo on his side. That said, he hasn't pushed to reset the league max since his initial deal, and I don't see him pushing for Burrows/Herbert money now.
2. On that topic...Wilson DOES want serious money, his own office, his own training staff, his...well, it's all about him, him, him at this point, and he's shown less endurance than Cousins, while also arguably looking "cooked" as opposed to "having a career year" which was the case for Kirk up to the Achilles "pop"
First of all, the list of NFL QB's that have torn their Achilles in their 30's in the last 30 years is Marino, Rodgers, and Cousins. Don't act like there's a graveyard of careers for Quarterbacks in their 30's who couldn't recover from an achilles tear. Again I'm going to side with modern medicine, world class athletic training, and someone in top physical condition to bounce back.
Secondly, what on Earth leads you to believe that Cousins' play is ready to fall off a cliff. In fact, this year his play was ASCENDING until the injury...dude was on pace for 5000 yards and 40+ TDs. Shit, Joe Flacco rolled off the couch at 39 years old and made the Browns a playoff contender after their season was all but sunk.
Look, I'm not advocating for a 5 year deal here, but a 2-3 year deal that gives the team time to find a successor while legitimately being able to be a playoff contender is the smartest thing for the team. And do so at a market fair price. You can't possibly tell me that Cousins isn't a better QB than any of the 4 QBs remaining in the NFC last week. Without the injury I honestly believe we'd have been a playoff team and likely competing this weekend. Kirk Cousins is PLENTY good enough for us to win a chip....period. And contrary to the naysayers, nothing about any of his contracts have stopped us from putting a championship team together. Poor/mediocre drafting and other personnel whiffs have WAY more to do with the team's lack of success than Kirk Cousins or any of his contracts.
Why do you think there are a list of teams hoping he hits the FA market? Why do you think he sits atop multiple lists as potentially the top free agent available? And the funniest thing is, he WANTS to play here...he'd rather NOT uproot his family. Yet there is a segment of fans who can't wait to see him run out of town. INSANE
First of all, the Vikings have been wanting to move off the Cousins contract for a couple years now. There's zero disputing that, it's been widely reported, and it's the reason he wasn't signed to an extension prior to this season and why the team decided to let him play the season out. Now he's another year older and coming off a major non contact injury. You can believe in modern medicine all you want, but signing him carries some risk to it on a couple different levels. I like Kirk, but you have to be a realist regarding the situation and not tie ourselves into another large contracts where he and his agent dictate terms. If some other team wants to play ball with him and roll the dice on that kind of deal....good luck to them. At some point the Vikings HAVE TO turn the page at quarterback
The only people that I've seen really talking about his contract are the "fans" that never shut up about his contract. He's been well below top QB money for some time, now, so all the harping about it is officially dunceville. The fact that some people who've cried about Kirk's money will even mention Wilson in the same post is...well, it's a special, gold-plated level of ignorant.
I get it, there's a collective of armchair GMs that are fapping themselves blind over the thought of a young stud QB on a rookie contract. However, I'm here to triple-dog-dare anyone to step into JJ's face and tell him that they think he should risk his productivity, and the team's productivity, because they REALLY want their mock draft to be right for once, and they're willing to move off of a productive, record-setting, proven QB that's known and genuinely treasured by his team to...be right.
Yes, I'm all for drafting the heir apparent...but we KNOW that Kirk, with JJ, Addison, Hock, etc can produce against anyone, including the favored NFCC team this weekend. No college boi has proven that at the NFL level.
|
