Quote: @AGRforever said:
Cousins took a pay decrease to remain a Viking. He did the exact thing most of you were bitching about. We get a two year deal to see if the new coaching staff wants to hang their coat with Cousins or learn that he's the turd some of you think he is.
Kirk didn't take a pay cut... he actually went from getting 35 million this year to like 50 million with the extension. The deal just lowered his cap hit this year and next because of the void years tacked on. Let's not act like Kirk did us a solid lol
Quote: @AGRforever said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ pattersaur said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Soo we basically got Kirk for one more year with a reduced cap hit this year, more big money next year and we now no longer control his trade option, leaving us once again scrambling in two years to figure out our QB situation as Cousins turns 36 years old, hits free agency, and any trade value would be extremely dimimished anyways.
This is a win for Cousins and his agent, not for the Vikings. I hope O'Connell turns him into this bona-fide MVP Candidate that he thinks he can but I won't hold my breath. Oh and by the way, anybody holding out for a "stud" rookie to be drafted next year to groom can forget about it because the Vikings won't lose enough games to put us in contention to be drafting that high. This was the year and the time to make a move. Now we've essentially pigeon holed ourselves into a two year window to get it done with Cousins, a rookie coaching staff, and a defense that needs an overhaul with a new scheme being implemented. I think it's a poor strategy and will hold steadfast in that opinion until this organization proves me wrong.
This is a fair take but it was said weeks ago that the Wilfs don’t want a rebuild. We knew this and they own the team, not us. That doesn’t make you wrong and them right but it’s the reality.
The good part of this extension is it’s short, we gain stability at the position, and we get to see what Kirk can do with KOC. The bad part is we probably won’t stink this season so we aren’t getting a crack at the blue chip QBs in 2023 (story of the franchise) and we also have a very uphill battle to win the division this year.
If it’s true- as been reported- that KOC was adament about wanting Kirk, what can we do other than hope he knows what he’s doing.
Well the Wilfs are fools then if they think they can overhaul the entire front office, coaching staff, and not understand that rebuilding is probably the best way to move past mediocrity. They shitcanned Zim and Spielman because they were tired of being average. That's fair..but if they think tying themselves to Cousins for two more years for big money with a rookie coaching staff and a roster with holes the size of the Grand Canyon is the roght recipe for long term Super Bowl success...they are likely very, very wrong. Give me a young QB I can build around for the next decade, not an above average 35 year old that I'm continuously having to shell our big money for and figure out his contract. When you hit the organizational reset button like the Wilfs decided to do, that's the kind of thing you are opening themselves up for. Unfortunately for the Wilfs and all of us, we are going to get more mediocre results over the next couple years with no answer on a long term QB
I don't think a single move is indicative of their path. See what happens next. If they basically "run it back" then I would ask the question, how much does a chance in FO and coaching staff really mean? But I don't think that will need to be asked. This FO will put their spin on the roster, Kirk is just going to be a part of that.
Committing themselve's to Cousins and his contract for the next two years certainly is indicative of their path now. They can spin it however they want but the smart money is on this team being average again next year with a rookie coaching staff installing new systems on both sides of the ball and a defense with holes everywhere. Say they go 7-10, or 8-9 next season (likely), that puts them going into the following season with Cousins once again entering the final year of his contract with a no trade clause in his back pocket. It also puts them out of the running to draft one of the elite prospects in 2023. This was the year to make a move, free up big cap money moving forward, and position ourselves to draft an elite QB prospect in 2023. None of that likely happens now.
Thank you for your insight and for clarifying how the season will go. Why even play the season or even partake in the draft because their "likely" 8-9 season means we wont get anyone good from the draft.
Part of long term planning is evaluating your roster, where you will likely be the following season, and figuring out how to allocate resources to upgrade the roster over the long haul. If you think we are winning the Super Bowl next year with a rookie coaching staff, new schemes on both sides of the ball, and huge holes to fill defensively...more power to you. The smart money is on us having a lot of ups and downs while familiarity is implemented and roster turn over takes place. If it's going to upset you to watch this team go 8-9 again or worse, you might not want to watch. We'd all love more but my scenario is much more realistic.
Sure, you could be correct...but why is Kirk the only player on the team that dictates our record? So many people say "Welp, Kirk is back so that means we are gonna be .500". W/L should never be a measurement used to evaluate a player. If so, then I could say "Danielle is making too much damn money, especially when we were 3-4 with him in games last year". That's ludicrous. I remember watching the GB game that Kirk didn't play in and laughed at how bad it was and how bad Mannion played. It's a team game so stop with the W/L for a QB just because you dont like him.
Regardless of Kirk, our ceiling next season is likely only 7 or 8 wins based on all those other factors I've brought up countless times. So they signed him to a one year extension which means we are in this exact same position with Cousins next offseason where he'll be going into the last year of his contract, be on the books for 36 million against the cap and now has a no trade clause in his back pocket. So each side only committed to the other for the next two seasons and we continue the shell game while trying to upgrade the roster. I disagree with that philosophy whole heartedly when the best time to move him in a trade was now. I would have taken the cap money and trade compensation over an only one year extension and commitment from Cousins. To me that's not in the best interest of the team because you are just kicking that can down the road for a season. Not worth it to get a "looksie" at what Cousins can do in this supposedly bad ass offense of OConnell's.
We were a bad bounce away from 4-5 more wins this year. With a coach everyone hated and a D that was bottom of the barrel. Do some work on the D and we might turn out just fine.
A few bounces and also not having injuries to important players who are mostly on the defensive side of the ball with the exception of Thielen. Idk, I'm just tired of the Cousins contract impacting what folks predict for the record. Makes no sense to me
Quote: @Knucklehead said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ StickyBun said:
It was only ever going to get so good. Its an improvement, but of course it won't please everyone. The new FO and HC were saddled with a guaranteed contract number for their QB. Its a process of mitigating the situation and then deciding what the best course of action is: which may be making a little chicken salad out of chicken shit. Just because its been reported some teams were interested in trading for Cousins doesn't mean they were good offers.
They are kicking the can down the road with Cousins and we'll be in this same exact situation next offseason with him entering the final year of his contract, except with a no trade clause in his back pocket this time and the Vikings still without a long term answer at the position.
As far as trades go even Geoff said they had at least one trade offer they really had to think about. There was definitely a market for him, but it's my opinion that the front office and the Wilfs were too chicken shit to be "really bad" this season to make what probably would have been the right move and decision for the team moving forward. Like I said, I hope Kwesi knows what he's doing and OConnell transforms Cousins into this MVP Candidate he envisions as the trigger man in his offense.
I'll add to this that next year with a projected strong rookie QB class, they'll be even less demand for a vet QB w/ a big cap number. But looking how the extension is structured, the team is committing to KC thru the 2023 season. It looks to me that the plan is to draft QBOTF in 2023 & have him sit & learn for a season.
That's a great plan...except, we probably won't lose enough games to be in draft position to take one of those guys and we would essentially be letting Kirk walk away for nothing after the 2023 season when we could have traded him for something now. We've given Cousins and his agent more power and control by giving them the no trade clause. So where does that leave the Vikings after 2023? Likely up shit creek unless they once again committed to Cousins with yet another extension as he approaches 36 years old
Quote: @Hawkvike25 said:
@ AGRforever said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Sure, you could be correct...but why is Kirk the only player on the team that dictates our record? So many people say "Welp, Kirk is back so that means we are gonna be .500". W/L should never be a measurement used to evaluate a player. If so, then I could say "Danielle is making too much damn money, especially when we were 3-4 with him in games last year". That's ludicrous. I remember watching the GB game that Kirk didn't play in and laughed at how bad it was and how bad Mannion played. It's a team game so stop with the W/L for a QB just because you dont like him.
Regardless of Kirk, our ceiling next season is likely only 7 or 8 wins based on all those other factors I've brought up countless times. So they signed him to a one year extension which means we are in this exact same position with Cousins next offseason where he'll be going into the last year of his contract, be on the books for 36 million against the cap and now has a no trade clause in his back pocket. So each side only committed to the other for the next two seasons and we continue the shell game while trying to upgrade the roster. I disagree with that philosophy whole heartedly when the best time to move him in a trade was now. I would have taken the cap money and trade compensation over an only one year extension and commitment from Cousins. To me that's not in the best interest of the team because you are just kicking that can down the road for a season. Not worth it to get a "looksie" at what Cousins can do in this supposedly bad ass offense of OConnell's.
We were a bad bounce away from 4-5 more wins this year. With a coach everyone hated and a D that was bottom of the barrel. Do some work on the D and we might turn out just fine.
A few bounces and also not having injuries to important players who are mostly on the defensive side of the ball with the exception of Thielen. Idk, I'm just tired of the Cousins contract impacting what folks predict for the record. Makes no sense to me
Probably based on our record with Kirk's first 4 years, maybe??
Oh and most of those important players are aging and trending less productive even if/when healthy.
Oh and many just think a very inexperienced coaching staff is just automatically better.
I can see both sides. But for me I have come to the conclusion that Kirk is not our answer and "and" our current roster needs a lot more than a few tweaks to give Kirk another 2 years to try and build around like Spelly did. I was hoping this new regime would create a different path than what Spelly would have. Oh well, Go Kirk!!!! Does any of this make sense to you?
Quote: @minny65 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ AGRforever said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Sure, you could be correct...but why is Kirk the only player on the team that dictates our record? So many people say "Welp, Kirk is back so that means we are gonna be .500". W/L should never be a measurement used to evaluate a player. If so, then I could say "Danielle is making too much damn money, especially when we were 3-4 with him in games last year". That's ludicrous. I remember watching the GB game that Kirk didn't play in and laughed at how bad it was and how bad Mannion played. It's a team game so stop with the W/L for a QB just because you dont like him.
Regardless of Kirk, our ceiling next season is likely only 7 or 8 wins based on all those other factors I've brought up countless times. So they signed him to a one year extension which means we are in this exact same position with Cousins next offseason where he'll be going into the last year of his contract, be on the books for 36 million against the cap and now has a no trade clause in his back pocket. So each side only committed to the other for the next two seasons and we continue the shell game while trying to upgrade the roster. I disagree with that philosophy whole heartedly when the best time to move him in a trade was now. I would have taken the cap money and trade compensation over an only one year extension and commitment from Cousins. To me that's not in the best interest of the team because you are just kicking that can down the road for a season. Not worth it to get a "looksie" at what Cousins can do in this supposedly bad ass offense of OConnell's.
We were a bad bounce away from 4-5 more wins this year. With a coach everyone hated and a D that was bottom of the barrel. Do some work on the D and we might turn out just fine.
A few bounces and also not having injuries to important players who are mostly on the defensive side of the ball with the exception of Thielen. Idk, I'm just tired of the Cousins contract impacting what folks predict for the record. Makes no sense to me
Probably based on our record with Kirk's first 4 years, maybe??
Oh and most of those important players are aging and trending less productive even if/when healthy.
Oh and many just think a very inexperienced coaching staff is just automatically better.
I can see both sides. But for me I have come to the conclusion that Kirk is not our answer and "and" our current roster needs a lot more than a few tweaks to give Kirk another 2 years to try and build around like Spelly did. I was hoping this new regime would create a different path than what Spelly would have. Oh well, Go Kirk!!!! Does any of this make sense to you?
Kirk isnt hurting Danielle's neck or tearing his pec. Kirk didnt draft Gladney and then have him get cut from the team. Kirk isn't telling Everson to go all crazy again and miss games. Kirk isn't getting Thielen, Kendricks, and Cook hurt. This isn't a oh he's making excuses for Kirk, I'm saying all that shit happened the last two years so just because Kirk agrees to an extension it doesn't mean "Well, we are just gonna go 7-10 or 8-9". Thats stupid
Quote: @Hawkvike25 said:
@ minny65 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ AGRforever said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Sure, you could be correct...but why is Kirk the only player on the team that dictates our record? So many people say "Welp, Kirk is back so that means we are gonna be .500". W/L should never be a measurement used to evaluate a player. If so, then I could say "Danielle is making too much damn money, especially when we were 3-4 with him in games last year". That's ludicrous. I remember watching the GB game that Kirk didn't play in and laughed at how bad it was and how bad Mannion played. It's a team game so stop with the W/L for a QB just because you dont like him.
Regardless of Kirk, our ceiling next season is likely only 7 or 8 wins based on all those other factors I've brought up countless times. So they signed him to a one year extension which means we are in this exact same position with Cousins next offseason where he'll be going into the last year of his contract, be on the books for 36 million against the cap and now has a no trade clause in his back pocket. So each side only committed to the other for the next two seasons and we continue the shell game while trying to upgrade the roster. I disagree with that philosophy whole heartedly when the best time to move him in a trade was now. I would have taken the cap money and trade compensation over an only one year extension and commitment from Cousins. To me that's not in the best interest of the team because you are just kicking that can down the road for a season. Not worth it to get a "looksie" at what Cousins can do in this supposedly bad ass offense of OConnell's.
We were a bad bounce away from 4-5 more wins this year. With a coach everyone hated and a D that was bottom of the barrel. Do some work on the D and we might turn out just fine.
A few bounces and also not having injuries to important players who are mostly on the defensive side of the ball with the exception of Thielen. Idk, I'm just tired of the Cousins contract impacting what folks predict for the record. Makes no sense to me
Probably based on our record with Kirk's first 4 years, maybe??
Oh and most of those important players are aging and trending less productive even if/when healthy.
Oh and many just think a very inexperienced coaching staff is just automatically better.
I can see both sides. But for me I have come to the conclusion that Kirk is not our answer and "and" our current roster needs a lot more than a few tweaks to give Kirk another 2 years to try and build around like Spelly did. I was hoping this new regime would create a different path than what Spelly would have. Oh well, Go Kirk!!!! Does any of this make sense to you?
Kirk isnt hurting Danielle's neck or tearing his pec. Kirk didnt draft Gladney and then have him get cut from the team. Kirk isn't telling Everson to go all crazy again and miss games. Kirk isn't getting Thielen, Kendricks, and Cook hurt. This isn't a oh he's making excuses for Kirk, I'm saying all that shit happened the last two years so just because Kirk agrees to an extension it doesn't mean "Well, we are just gonna go 7-10 or 8-9". Thats stupid
Its not just about Kirk, but the entire puzzle when saying this team is likely only a 7 or 8 win team next year. It's a rationale conclusion when taking the entire puzzle into account with a new coaching staff and everything else.
Kirk is a good quarterback, not a great quarterback. Does good quarterback play tip the scales on a team with a lot of other factors going against it for the upcoming season? I don't believe it does and then we are right back on the same boat with Cousins and his contract next season, when we could have flipped him for something now. I think it was the wrong move and sets us up for the mediocrity to continue.
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ minny65 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ AGRforever said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Sure, you could be correct...but why is Kirk the only player on the team that dictates our record? So many people say "Welp, Kirk is back so that means we are gonna be .500". W/L should never be a measurement used to evaluate a player. If so, then I could say "Danielle is making too much damn money, especially when we were 3-4 with him in games last year". That's ludicrous. I remember watching the GB game that Kirk didn't play in and laughed at how bad it was and how bad Mannion played. It's a team game so stop with the W/L for a QB just because you dont like him.
Regardless of Kirk, our ceiling next season is likely only 7 or 8 wins based on all those other factors I've brought up countless times. So they signed him to a one year extension which means we are in this exact same position with Cousins next offseason where he'll be going into the last year of his contract, be on the books for 36 million against the cap and now has a no trade clause in his back pocket. So each side only committed to the other for the next two seasons and we continue the shell game while trying to upgrade the roster. I disagree with that philosophy whole heartedly when the best time to move him in a trade was now. I would have taken the cap money and trade compensation over an only one year extension and commitment from Cousins. To me that's not in the best interest of the team because you are just kicking that can down the road for a season. Not worth it to get a "looksie" at what Cousins can do in this supposedly bad ass offense of OConnell's.
We were a bad bounce away from 4-5 more wins this year. With a coach everyone hated and a D that was bottom of the barrel. Do some work on the D and we might turn out just fine.
A few bounces and also not having injuries to important players who are mostly on the defensive side of the ball with the exception of Thielen. Idk, I'm just tired of the Cousins contract impacting what folks predict for the record. Makes no sense to me
Probably based on our record with Kirk's first 4 years, maybe??
Oh and most of those important players are aging and trending less productive even if/when healthy.
Oh and many just think a very inexperienced coaching staff is just automatically better.
I can see both sides. But for me I have come to the conclusion that Kirk is not our answer and "and" our current roster needs a lot more than a few tweaks to give Kirk another 2 years to try and build around like Spelly did. I was hoping this new regime would create a different path than what Spelly would have. Oh well, Go Kirk!!!! Does any of this make sense to you?
Kirk isnt hurting Danielle's neck or tearing his pec. Kirk didnt draft Gladney and then have him get cut from the team. Kirk isn't telling Everson to go all crazy again and miss games. Kirk isn't getting Thielen, Kendricks, and Cook hurt. This isn't a oh he's making excuses for Kirk, I'm saying all that shit happened the last two years so just because Kirk agrees to an extension it doesn't mean "Well, we are just gonna go 7-10 or 8-9". Thats stupid
Its not just about Kirk, but the entire puzzle when saying this team is likely only a 7 or 8 win team next year. It's a rationale conclusion when taking the entire puzzle into account with a new coaching staff and everything else.
Kirk is a good quarterback, not a great quarterback. Does good quarterback play tip the scales on a team with a lot of other factors going against it for the upcoming season? I don't believe it does and then we are right back on the same boat with Cousins and his contract next season, when we could have flipped him for something now. I think it was the wrong move and sets us up for the mediocrity to continue.
Ok fine, you think he's not a great quarterback, but you cant say well it's X wins this year now because he signed an extension. It just doesn't work that way. The twins just traded for Sonny Gray and he has a 82-72 career record...guess that means it was a bad trade. See how dumb I look there?
Quote: @AGRforever said:
Cousins took a pay decrease to remain a Viking. He did the exact thing most of you were bitching about. We get a two year deal to see if the new coaching staff wants to hang their coat with Cousins or learn that he's the turd some of you think he is.
how do you figure he took a pay cut? He was set to make 35 million this year and be done, he is now making 40 million this year, and 36 million next year. that looks like an extra 5 million this year and a guaranteed no trade clause 36 million next year. I dont see the sacrifice on his part.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ AGRforever said:
Cousins took a pay decrease to remain a Viking. He did the exact thing most of you were bitching about. We get a two year deal to see if the new coaching staff wants to hang their coat with Cousins or learn that he's the turd some of you think he is.
how do you figure he took a pay cut? He was set to make 35 million this year and be done, he is now making 40 million this year, and 36 million next year. that looks like an extra 5 million this year and a guaranteed no trade clause 36 million next year. I dont see the sacrifice on his part.
Well, he also did agree to trade-in the creeper mini-van. It was a PR disaster that even the marketing interns from Sanford/Yale/Harvard couldn't overcome sending the wrong messaging. So our marketing will be better this year!
![[Image: ws6qt46o8yg5.jpeg]](https://vikefans.com/vfforums/uploads/editor/gz/ws6qt46o8yg5.jpeg)
We’re fuckin’ doomed I tell ya… 
|
