Quote: @Havoc1649 said:
@ minny65 said:
Differing opinions, different takes, and differing ways to get us to a SB competitive team exist and can be as valid as the group think of the most consistent and repetitive posters.
For example: I can understand why the posters who want to extend Kirk. They think he is good enough to get us to the promised land and make us playoff caliber for the next few years. I don't want to try and speak for them but most of their thought process is stat based (he is clearly a Top 8-10 QB consistently) and the thought that we have a good enough base of players with a couple tweaks and better coaching to surround Kirk and shift those stats into "team" wins.
I am in the other group. The group who are labeled irrational, don't know football, can't interpret stats as well, don't watch football, etc.... all because we don't see things the way they want us too. These posters then group up and chide with the labels.
I noticed most of the same posters who supported Zimmer a few years longer because they know stats, they know football, and are rational. Now that he is gone they are quick to throw him under the bus and blame him for all that went wrong. Zimmer bad...Kirk good.
Also, they are so much smarter then us that they know that drafting a QB who could become a good starting NFL QB is very low and not worth the risk vs reward of maybe finding a franchise QB on a cheap contract to build around. They wish we could understand that this is the only way! No, FA guys like Kirk, Bradford etc are clearly the better approach just because that is what we have done with awesome results for the majority of this teams history.
Lastly, I wonder what their reaction will be in a few years if we extend Kirk and the results are the same as we have seen with his first 4 years here and 4 with Washington. Then maybe they will have seen enough like several us now have seen enough naively of course.
I also wonder what they will think if the new regime trades him. Will it be because the new regime is irrational, can't interpret stats, don't know football or will it automatically switch their banter and chiding and come to an epiphany that Kirk was not the answer....yikes!
My point: Let's allow differing opinions without pretending it is beyond your comprehension as to why someone has a differing opinion. Not everyone thinks the same and it doesn't make them less of a fan or just stupid.
What I would like to see are rational arguments. Even saying you don’t like the guy is rational. Saying his W/L record is somehow relevant is not. Not when we all watch him move the ball up and down the field when it matters, only to see the defense or a kicker blow it. The stats exist for a reason. A QB rating exists for a reason. The very purpose is to differentiate performance with a reasonable separation from the team. It’s been the official formula used by the NFL since 1973 to determine its passing leaders.
The flip side goes for the passer rating for a defense. A measure of how a defense performed. This is because a team that can produce good performance from these two areas historically produce wins at the highest rate and are competitive for a championship.
Ratings for QB’s have gone up in the past 10-15 years due to changes in the game and QB’s and likely coaching simply getting better. Currently, Cousins is #7 all time. Does that mean Cousins will win a title? No. Does it mean he has an exceptional chance if he can be on a team with a good defense - absolutely. Statistically, his performances each year paired with a good defense will stand an excellent chance of winning. Without this, the odds are small and get smaller the poorer the defensive performance. He is in the same boat as Matthew Stafford was for an even longer period of time. He’s in the same boat Rodgers has been in for many seasons. There has to be balance no matter who is behind center.
My point is, argue your gut, argue a feeling, argue his price tag, argue his flaws. Don't continue to try to argue stats don’t matter. They demonstrably do and have going back decades.
A team must have a high performing QB to be competitive. Without one, you will not win a championship. The odds are exceptionally low. That’s why a team like the Colts have been swinging for one for going on 6 years now. It’s a must have. If you give that away, there needs to be some rationale or logic involved.
“I think we are better off moving from Cousins to get rid of his large contract and then pursuing Jimmy G.” - there may be push back for this opinion due to the weaknesses Jimmy has, but it’s at least rational. It’s a real argument.
Or, “we have the defense, but our QB just isn’t good enough or elite enough to get us there”.
“I think he’s a weirdo.”
“Just because” which is the vast majority of what I read on here, is usually wrapped in an irrelevant or spurious argument. It doesn’t actually say anything. No one should be surprised if readers would like a little more specificity when essentially none is given. People like a thought process presented or even an opinion that isn’t predicated on something that isn’t true.
For instance, one I see often, “Cousins just pads stats at the end of a game”. We all know this isn’t true. We are never in games where that’s even a possibility. The few times we do get a lead, we go conservative run the ball up the middle until stopped. Yet I see this obviously false claim often used to justify getting rid of him. That’s what I’m tired of. The use of irrelevant or untruthful claims to justify an “opinion”. Simply saying “I think he’s a dink” is more impactful than making things up.
You act like our defense has repeatedly blown leads after Kirk drives us down the field... that only happened THIS season. It was an anomaly in his 4 years here.
Also, go look up our defensive metrics in 2018 and 2019. Tell me how Kirk didn't have a top defense you complain he hasn't had since he's been a Viking...
Your argument isn't rationale either my guy.
Quote: @Wetlander said:
@ Havoc1649 said:
@ minny65 said:
Differing opinions, different takes, and differing ways to get us to a SB competitive team exist and can be as valid as the group think of the most consistent and repetitive posters.
For example: I can understand why the posters who want to extend Kirk. They think he is good enough to get us to the promised land and make us playoff caliber for the next few years. I don't want to try and speak for them but most of their thought process is stat based (he is clearly a Top 8-10 QB consistently) and the thought that we have a good enough base of players with a couple tweaks and better coaching to surround Kirk and shift those stats into "team" wins.
I am in the other group. The group who are labeled irrational, don't know football, can't interpret stats as well, don't watch football, etc.... all because we don't see things the way they want us too. These posters then group up and chide with the labels.
I noticed most of the same posters who supported Zimmer a few years longer because they know stats, they know football, and are rational. Now that he is gone they are quick to throw him under the bus and blame him for all that went wrong. Zimmer bad...Kirk good.
Also, they are so much smarter then us that they know that drafting a QB who could become a good starting NFL QB is very low and not worth the risk vs reward of maybe finding a franchise QB on a cheap contract to build around. They wish we could understand that this is the only way! No, FA guys like Kirk, Bradford etc are clearly the better approach just because that is what we have done with awesome results for the majority of this teams history.
Lastly, I wonder what their reaction will be in a few years if we extend Kirk and the results are the same as we have seen with his first 4 years here and 4 with Washington. Then maybe they will have seen enough like several us now have seen enough naively of course.
I also wonder what they will think if the new regime trades him. Will it be because the new regime is irrational, can't interpret stats, don't know football or will it automatically switch their banter and chiding and come to an epiphany that Kirk was not the answer....yikes!
My point: Let's allow differing opinions without pretending it is beyond your comprehension as to why someone has a differing opinion. Not everyone thinks the same and it doesn't make them less of a fan or just stupid.
What I would like to see are rational arguments. Even saying you don’t like the guy is rational. Saying his W/L record is somehow relevant is not. Not when we all watch him move the ball up and down the field when it matters, only to see the defense or a kicker blow it. The stats exist for a reason. A QB rating exists for a reason. The very purpose is to differentiate performance with a reasonable separation from the team. It’s been the official formula used by the NFL since 1973 to determine its passing leaders.
The flip side goes for the passer rating for a defense. A measure of how a defense performed. This is because a team that can produce good performance from these two areas historically produce wins at the highest rate and are competitive for a championship.
Ratings for QB’s have gone up in the past 10-15 years due to changes in the game and QB’s and likely coaching simply getting better. Currently, Cousins is #7 all time. Does that mean Cousins will win a title? No. Does it mean he has an exceptional chance if he can be on a team with a good defense - absolutely. Statistically, his performances each year paired with a good defense will stand an excellent chance of winning. Without this, the odds are small and get smaller the poorer the defensive performance. He is in the same boat as Matthew Stafford was for an even longer period of time. He’s in the same boat Rodgers has been in for many seasons. There has to be balance no matter who is behind center.
My point is, argue your gut, argue a feeling, argue his price tag, argue his flaws. Don't continue to try to argue stats don’t matter. They demonstrably do and have going back decades.
A team must have a high performing QB to be competitive. Without one, you will not win a championship. The odds are exceptionally low. That’s why a team like the Colts have been swinging for one for going on 6 years now. It’s a must have. If you give that away, there needs to be some rationale or logic involved.
“I think we are better off moving from Cousins to get rid of his large contract and then pursuing Jimmy G.” - there may be push back for this opinion due to the weaknesses Jimmy has, but it’s at least rational. It’s a real argument.
Or, “we have the defense, but our QB just isn’t good enough or elite enough to get us there”.
“I think he’s a weirdo.”
“Just because” which is the vast majority of what I read on here, is usually wrapped in an irrelevant or spurious argument. It doesn’t actually say anything. No one should be surprised if readers would like a little more specificity when essentially none is given. People like a thought process presented or even an opinion that isn’t predicated on something that isn’t true.
For instance, one I see often, “Cousins just pads stats at the end of a game”. We all know this isn’t true. We are never in games where that’s even a possibility. The few times we do get a lead, we go conservative run the ball up the middle until stopped. Yet I see this obviously false claim often used to justify getting rid of him. That’s what I’m tired of. The use of irrelevant or untruthful claims to justify an “opinion”. Simply saying “I think he’s a dink” is more impactful than making things up.
You act like our defense has repeatedly blown leads after Kirk drives us down the field... that only happened THIS season. It was an anomaly in his 4 years here.
Also, go look up our defensive metrics in 2018 and 2019. Tell me how Kirk didn't have a top defense you complain he hasn't had since he's been a Viking...
Your argument isn't rationale either my guy.
It's not just Cousins...it's a combination of him, the offensive line and the defense. As a whole or TEAM, they all under performed and that's why they had bad seasons.
Quote: @ArizonaViking said:
@ Wetlander said:
@ Havoc1649 said:
@ minny65 said:
Differing opinions, different takes, and differing ways to get us to a SB competitive team exist and can be as valid as the group think of the most consistent and repetitive posters.
For example: I can understand why the posters who want to extend Kirk. They think he is good enough to get us to the promised land and make us playoff caliber for the next few years. I don't want to try and speak for them but most of their thought process is stat based (he is clearly a Top 8-10 QB consistently) and the thought that we have a good enough base of players with a couple tweaks and better coaching to surround Kirk and shift those stats into "team" wins.
I am in the other group. The group who are labeled irrational, don't know football, can't interpret stats as well, don't watch football, etc.... all because we don't see things the way they want us too. These posters then group up and chide with the labels.
I noticed most of the same posters who supported Zimmer a few years longer because they know stats, they know football, and are rational. Now that he is gone they are quick to throw him under the bus and blame him for all that went wrong. Zimmer bad...Kirk good.
Also, they are so much smarter then us that they know that drafting a QB who could become a good starting NFL QB is very low and not worth the risk vs reward of maybe finding a franchise QB on a cheap contract to build around. They wish we could understand that this is the only way! No, FA guys like Kirk, Bradford etc are clearly the better approach just because that is what we have done with awesome results for the majority of this teams history.
What I would like to see are rational arguments. Even saying you don’t like the guy is rational. Saying his W/L record is somehow relevant is not. Not when we all watch him move the ball up and down the field when it matters, only to see the defense or a kicker blow it. The stats exist for a reason. A QB rating exists for a reason. The very purpose is to differentiate performance with a reasonable separation from the team. It’s been the official formula used by the NFL since 1973 to determine its passing leaders.
The flip side goes for the passer rating for a defense. A measure of how a defense performed. This is because a team that can produce good performance from these two areas historically produce wins at the highest rate and are competitive for a championship.
Ratings for QB’s have gone up in the past 10-15 years due to changes in the game and QB’s and likely coaching simply getting better. Currently, Cousins is #7 all time. Does that mean Cousins will win a title? No. Does it mean he has an exceptional chance if he can be on a team with a good defense - absolutely. Statistically, his performances each year paired with a good defense will stand an excellent chance of winning. Without this, the odds are small and get smaller the poorer the defensive performance. He is in the same boat as Matthew Stafford was for an even longer period of time. He’s in the same boat Rodgers has been in for many seasons. There has to be balance no matter who is behind center.
My point is, argue your gut, argue a feeling, argue his price tag, argue his flaws. Don't continue to try to argue stats don’t matter. They demonstrably do and have going back decades.
A team must have a high performing QB to be competitive. Without one, you will not win a championship. The odds are exceptionally low. That’s why a team like the Colts have been swinging for one for going on 6 years now. It’s a must have. If you give that away, there needs to be some rationale or logic involved.
“I think we are better off moving from Cousins to get rid of his large contract and then pursuing Jimmy G.” - there may be push back for this opinion due to the weaknesses Jimmy has, but it’s at least rational. It’s a real argument.
Or, “we have the defense, but our QB just isn’t good enough or elite enough to get us there”.
“I think he’s a weirdo.”
“Just because” which is the vast majority of what I read on here, is usually wrapped in an irrelevant or spurious argument. It doesn’t actually say anything. No one should be surprised if readers would like a little more specificity when essentially none is given. People like a thought process presented or even an opinion that isn’t predicated on something that isn’t true.
For instance, one I see often, “Cousins just pads stats at the end of a game”. We all know this isn’t true. We are never in games where that’s even a possibility. The few times we do get a lead, we go conservative run the ball up the middle until stopped. Yet I see this obviously false claim often used to justify getting rid of him. That’s what I’m tired of. The use of irrelevant or untruthful claims to justify an “opinion”. Simply saying “I think he’s a dink” is more impactful than making things up.
You act like our defense has repeatedly blown leads after Kirk drives us down the field... that only happened THIS season. It was an anomaly in his 4 years here.
Also, go look up our defensive metrics in 2018 and 2019. Tell me how Kirk didn't have a top defense you complain he hasn't had since he's been a Viking...
Your argument isn't rationale either my guy.
It's not just Cousins...it's a combination of him, the offensive line and the defense. As a whole or TEAM, they all under performed and that's why they had bad seasons.
My post wasn't blaming Cousins for our record the last 4 years. I was just responding to Havoc's irrational post that absolves Cousins of any blame for the team's shortcomings the past 4 years.
We've seen Kirk with a top defense for two years and made the playoffs in one of those seasons. We've seen him with a bad defense for two seasons. Kirk is part of the problem, but he's not the only problem.
Just pointing out you can't sit there and say if we give Cousins a top defense, we'll finally see this team become a contender. Why can't we all just accept that he's one of the best QBs at play action and with a clean pocket, but isn't the best at extending plays, and has some issues with situational football? Everyone wants to blame the defense for the Detroit loss, but look at our last drive... Cousins was snapping the ball with 10-12 seconds on the play clock. You ever see Brady, Rodgers, etc do that when they are trying to burn clock at the end of a game with a lead? Nope. The Vikings probably win that game if Cousins remembered to drain the clock (or had a coach remind him, but a veteran QB shouldn't need that). At this point, Cousins is who he is as a QB.
Hopefully O'Connell can devise ways to hide Cousins' weaknesses and accentuate his strengths. Gruden and Zimmer were unable to do that consistently... Maybe the 3rd time is the charm?
Quote: @Wetlander said:
@ ArizonaViking said:
@ Wetlander said:
It's not just Cousins...it's a combination of him, the offensive line and the defense. As a whole or TEAM, they all under performed and that's why they had bad seasons.
My post wasn't blaming Cousins for our record the last 4 years. I was just responding to Havoc's irrational post that absolves Cousins of any blame for the team's shortcomings the past 4 years.
We've seen Kirk with a top defense for two years and made the playoffs in one of those seasons. We've seen him with a bad defense for two seasons. Kirk is part of the problem, but he's not the only problem.
Just pointing out you can't sit there and say if we give Cousins a top defense, we'll finally see this team become a contender. Why can't we all just accept that he's one of the best QBs at play action and with a clean pocket, but isn't the best at extending plays, and has some issues with situational football? Everyone wants to blame the defense for the Detroit loss, but look at our last drive... Cousins was snapping the ball with 10-12 seconds on the play clock. You ever see Brady, Rodgers, etc do that when they are trying to burn clock at the end of a game with a lead? Nope. The Vikings probably win that game if Cousins remembered to drain the clock (or had a coach remind him, but a veteran QB shouldn't need that). At this point, Cousins is who he is as a QB.
Hopefully O'Connell can devise ways to hide Cousins' weaknesses and accentuate his strengths. Gruden and Zimmer were unable to do that consistently... Maybe the 3rd time is the charm?
That's what I'm banking on...I am banking on this a lot to be honest.
That and some D improvement.
I think the OC'ing in MN the last few years has been below league average.
In the past, the “Supporters of Zimmer” didn’t have a lot of the information we have now. We knew he was a hard ass, and liked to run the ball. We knew he wasn’t a fan of kickers. We knew he liked to play a certain style of defense, and we liked it.
But, we didn’t know how bad things had gotten around the team because of him. So, with more information, most of us who liked and defended him, flipped to the other side.
With Kirk, we know he’s quirky, we know he puts up very good numbers, and we know he’s capable of driving a team down the field to get the FG or TD to put the team ahead. We’d like to see what he does in an offense built to take advantage of his skill set. We’d also like for it to be a consistent system and have the same OC, which will pretty much be KOC’s doing.
I'm optimistic about what can be done by just playing to the strengths of Kirk, and staying away from those things that don’t work.
Zimmer being stubborn was one of the things that turned me against him as a coach. He says he wanted Kirk to take chances, but his insistence on running the ball all the time hardly gave that impression of how he wanted his QB to be.
He also said he didn’t want Cousins’ contract to make in prohibitive to field a great defense. I don’t think it did. Seemly there some very good defensive players on the team the last couple of years, and they couldn’t get the job done, but Zimmer acted like it was because they paid Kirk too much. He was kind of a D-Bag!
Fans can change their mind about someone.
Quote: @jargomcfargo said:
@ Bullazin said:
@ jargomcfargo said:
@ minny65 said:
Differing opinions, different takes, and differing ways to get us to a SB competitive team exist and can be as valid as the group think of the most consistent and repetitive posters.
For example: I can understand why the posters who want to extend Kirk. They think he is good enough to get us to the promised land and make us playoff caliber for the next few years. I don't want to try and speak for them but most of their thought process is stat based (he is clearly a Top 8-10 QB consistently) and the thought that we have a good enough base of players with a couple tweaks and better coaching to surround Kirk and shift those stats into "team" wins.
I am in the other group. The group who are labeled irrational, don't know football, can't interpret stats as well, don't watch football, etc.... all because we don't see things the way they want us too. These posters then group up and chide with the labels.
I noticed most of the same posters who supported Zimmer a few years longer because they know stats, they know football, and are rational. Now that he is gone they are quick to throw him under the bus and blame him for all that went wrong. Zimmer bad...Kirk good.
Also, they are so much smarter then us that they know that drafting a QB who could become a good starting NFL QB is very low and not worth the risk vs reward of maybe finding a franchise QB on a cheap contract to build around. They wish we could understand that this is the only way! No, FA guys like Kirk, Bradford etc are clearly the better approach just because that is what we have done with awesome results for the majority of this teams history.
Lastly, I wonder what their reaction will be in a few years if we extend Kirk and the results are the same as we have seen with his first 4 years here and 4 with Washington. Then maybe they will have seen enough like several us now have seen enough naively of course.
I also wonder what they will think if the new regime trades him. Will it be because the new regime is irrational, can't interpret stats, don't know football or will it automatically switch their banter and chiding and come to an epiphany that Kirk was not the answer....yikes!
My point: Let's allow differing opinions without pretending it is beyond your comprehension as to why someone has a differing opinion. Not everyone thinks the same and it doesn't make them less of a fan or just stupid.
I agree. No opposing opinions tolerated by the prolific posters, who tend to gang up get personal with certain posters. It happens on all these forums. But we are all after the same thing. We just have differing opinions how to get there.
NJVike got banned for his style of posting. Rightfully so. But his premise turned out to be correct.
NJ was always irrational. Heck if I start railing on Kwesi right now, theres better odds that he will be fired within 15 years than he will be THE ONE. that doesnt make my argument valid or rational.
The premise that Spielman wouldn't bring a Lombardi to the Vikings was true. Sure, you could make that statement about Kwesi now and the odds are it will be true. I hope not. But did you make that statement about Spielman? Do you wish to make that statement about Kwesi?
Point is, and I shouldn't have used NJVike as my example, but every once in a while, the masses are wrong.
minny65 presented a very good post. Guess I should have read it and moved on!
Not at all bro, that name still triggers me I guess lol
I was just early.
(that's what she said)
Quote: @StickyBun said:
I was just early.
(that's what she said)
Well, baseball is back.
|
