Quote: @supafreak84 said:
@ medaille said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Again, if there is no intention to retain him on an extension past this upcoming season, the smart thing to do is to trade his ass. Sorry but we aren't going to the Super Bowl this upcoming season with or without Kirk Cousins (attention Wilf family!) Geoff thinks we can still get a late 1st round pick or some type of package of picks in trade compensation for Cousins, so how does that not make sense to do that? Yes, you are essentially sacrificing the upcoming season and yes the optics may look bad to Jefferson, but if there's a long term plan...do it! The Kirk Cousin hostage train is annoying every offseason. It's become the Minnesota version of Aaron Rodgers and if he is going to come back and play or not. As much as I like Kirk, it's time for this GM to step up to the plate and put his own stamp on the organization and I think even he knows that he can't do that as long as we keep playing the Cousins extension game.
Vikings are not going to trade their QB without first having their QBOTF in the pipeline.
And by what means would they go about acquiring a QBOTF prior to trading Cousins? I also think if that were to happen first it lowers the trade value and would give other teams leverage in trade talks. There's really just no way to finesse this Cousins situation to where the pieces line up perfectly for the Vikings. If they want off the rollercoaster they just need to jump at some point and trust in their new front office to make the right decisions in addressing the QB position.
It’s not rocket science.
You can just draft a QB, and then figure out what to do with
Cousins. You can let Cousins start a
year, and the rookie can develop or you can trade him to a team Cousins would
like to go if the kid looks amazing. I don’t think maximizing
trade value is an important part of the conversation, and there’s nothing
saying that you can’t have two QBs on the team at the same time. I’d much rather get a new QB first, than get
rid of Cousins first.
Well again, if it's not rocket science, where are the Vikings coming up with this young franchise QB? If you give up picks for Lamar Jackson he is your starter and Cousins needs to be traded likely at a reduced rate because teams know the Vikings would need to move him. We aren't in draft position to acquire a QB, so unless we are giving up picks we don't have for an unknown commodity in a trade up, where are we getting a QB to start this transition plan?
I don’t agree that the Vikings aren’t in a position to draft a QB. Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Hurts, Brees, Favre, Jackson, etc. were all taken at our pick or later. Mahomes was acquired by a team initially drafting later than us. If you expand the criteria to guys who are merely good like Cousins or Carr (but on a rookie contract) the number of options is much larger. The NFL just isn’t that good at picking the winners from the losers. Good talent will fall in the draft. Maybe not every draft, but you certainly don’t need a top 3 pick to end up with a good QB. Maybe there’s none available this year, and in that case resign Cousins for a year or two, and try again next year.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Again, if there is no intention to retain him on an extension past this upcoming season, the smart thing to do is to trade his ass. Sorry but we aren't going to the Super Bowl this upcoming season with or without Kirk Cousins (attention Wilf family!) Geoff thinks we can still get a late 1st round pick or some type of package of picks in trade compensation for Cousins, so how does that not make sense to do that? Yes, you are essentially sacrificing the upcoming season and yes the optics may look bad to Jefferson, but if there's a long term plan...do it! The Kirk Cousin hostage train is annoying every offseason. It's become the Minnesota version of Aaron Rodgers and if he is going to come back and play or not. As much as I like Kirk, it's time for this GM to step up to the plate and put his own stamp on the organization and I think even he knows that he can't do that as long as we keep playing the Cousins extension game.
Vikings are not going to trade their QB without first having their QBOTF in the pipeline.
And by what means would they go about acquiring a QBOTF prior to trading Cousins? I also think if that were to happen first it lowers the trade value and would give other teams leverage in trade talks. There's really just no way to finesse this Cousins situation to where the pieces line up perfectly for the Vikings. If they want off the rollercoaster they just need to jump at some point and trust in their new front office to make the right decisions in addressing the QB position.
By drafting one. Confused by the question.
No team would ever trade their perfectly good veteran QB for a draft pick. It would just never happen. Draft one, see what he's got, then trade? Sure. QB for QB, OK, but the QB has to be proven.
But QB for a rookie? Never happen. Not in a million years. Imagine the egg on the face of the GM of a 13-win team trading one of the NFL's best QBs, who's still only 34, for a draft pick that turns out to be Dwayne Haskins or Baker Mayfield or Sam Darnold or Josh Rosen or Trubisky or Wentz or Winston or Mariota, or Bortles, Manziel, Manuel, RGIII, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder.........No, it would never happen.
I think for some of you, your hatred of Cousins has clouded your ability to see things clearly.
Nothing confusing about it. We are on a time restriction with Cousin's playing out the last year of his deal with the Vikings unwilling to budge on the guaranteed money he wants in an extension. So do we simply let him play out the last year of his contract and let him walk for nothing at the end of the year, or do you recoup what you can now in a trade pre-draft and use the assets acquired to try to move up in the draft to land a young franchise QB? To me the latter makes much more sense. I like Kirk, I just don't like playing the contract/extension game with Kirk every offseason and understand his time is coming to an end, whether this year or next
There really is no more debate in the world, only sides.....that get further entrenched and double downed upon.
Quote: @StickyBun said:
There really is no more debate in the world, only sides.....that get further entrenched and double downed upon.
debate ended with civility in disagreement. it seems nobody is able to disagree on anything without using negative labels specifically for the purpose of creating anger and division. everybody talks about not wanting echo chambers on these sites, but as soon as there is something to disagree about, the fangs and claws come out and drive the opposing view points away. wish it was just an internet thing, but sadly its happening in our country as a whole. I have never heard as much talk about succession from people as I have in the last few years.
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Again, if there is no intention to retain him on an extension past this upcoming season, the smart thing to do is to trade his ass. Sorry but we aren't going to the Super Bowl this upcoming season with or without Kirk Cousins (attention Wilf family!) Geoff thinks we can still get a late 1st round pick or some type of package of picks in trade compensation for Cousins, so how does that not make sense to do that? Yes, you are essentially sacrificing the upcoming season and yes the optics may look bad to Jefferson, but if there's a long term plan...do it! The Kirk Cousin hostage train is annoying every offseason. It's become the Minnesota version of Aaron Rodgers and if he is going to come back and play or not. As much as I like Kirk, it's time for this GM to step up to the plate and put his own stamp on the organization and I think even he knows that he can't do that as long as we keep playing the Cousins extension game.
Vikings are not going to trade their QB without first having their QBOTF in the pipeline.
And by what means would they go about acquiring a QBOTF prior to trading Cousins? I also think if that were to happen first it lowers the trade value and would give other teams leverage in trade talks. There's really just no way to finesse this Cousins situation to where the pieces line up perfectly for the Vikings. If they want off the rollercoaster they just need to jump at some point and trust in their new front office to make the right decisions in addressing the QB position.
By drafting one. Confused by the question.
No team would ever trade their perfectly good veteran QB for a draft pick. It would just never happen. Draft one, see what he's got, then trade? Sure. QB for QB, OK, but the QB has to be proven.
But QB for a rookie? Never happen. Not in a million years. Imagine the egg on the face of the GM of a 13-win team trading one of the NFL's best QBs, who's still only 34, for a draft pick that turns out to be Dwayne Haskins or Baker Mayfield or Sam Darnold or Josh Rosen or Trubisky or Wentz or Winston or Mariota, or Bortles, Manziel, Manuel, RGIII, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder.........No, it would never happen.
I think for some of you, your hatred of Cousins has clouded your ability to see things clearly.
Nothing confusing about it. We are on a time restriction with Cousin's playing out the last year of his deal with the Vikings unwilling to budge on the guaranteed money he wants in an extension. So do we simply let him play out the last year of his contract and let him walk for nothing at the end of the year, or do you recoup what you can now in a trade pre-draft and use the assets acquired to try to move up in the draft to land a young franchise QB? To me the latter makes much more sense. I like Kirk, I just don't like playing the contract/extension game with Kirk every offseason and understand his time is coming to an end, whether this year or next
I wouldn't be so sure about that. I think the team wants to see what he does in year two of the offense. And how he performs in '23 will dictate what happens with the contract.
Of course, if they have a chance to land a much younger, proven veteran like Lamar Jackson, they might just do that. And I would not be opposed to that at all. See, for me, it's not as much about the QB as it is about avoiding the crapshoot and getting a proven vet. I think any time you have a chance to get one--whether it's Cousins in '18 or Jackson in '23 or Brady in '21 or even Russell Wilson in '22--you gotta do that. But it's not going to be for a QB who's never played a down in the NFL. Unless someone has gone off the wails on a Kwesi twain. :-)
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Again, if there is no intention to retain him on an extension past this upcoming season, the smart thing to do is to trade his ass. Sorry but we aren't going to the Super Bowl this upcoming season with or without Kirk Cousins (attention Wilf family!) Geoff thinks we can still get a late 1st round pick or some type of package of picks in trade compensation for Cousins, so how does that not make sense to do that? Yes, you are essentially sacrificing the upcoming season and yes the optics may look bad to Jefferson, but if there's a long term plan...do it! The Kirk Cousin hostage train is annoying every offseason. It's become the Minnesota version of Aaron Rodgers and if he is going to come back and play or not. As much as I like Kirk, it's time for this GM to step up to the plate and put his own stamp on the organization and I think even he knows that he can't do that as long as we keep playing the Cousins extension game.
Vikings are not going to trade their QB without first having their QBOTF in the pipeline.
And by what means would they go about acquiring a QBOTF prior to trading Cousins? I also think if that were to happen first it lowers the trade value and would give other teams leverage in trade talks. There's really just no way to finesse this Cousins situation to where the pieces line up perfectly for the Vikings. If they want off the rollercoaster they just need to jump at some point and trust in their new front office to make the right decisions in addressing the QB position.
By drafting one. Confused by the question.
No team would ever trade their perfectly good veteran QB for a draft pick. It would just never happen. Draft one, see what he's got, then trade? Sure. QB for QB, OK, but the QB has to be proven.
But QB for a rookie? Never happen. Not in a million years. Imagine the egg on the face of the GM of a 13-win team trading one of the NFL's best QBs, who's still only 34, for a draft pick that turns out to be Dwayne Haskins or Baker Mayfield or Sam Darnold or Josh Rosen or Trubisky or Wentz or Winston or Mariota, or Bortles, Manziel, Manuel, RGIII, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder.........No, it would never happen.
I think for some of you, your hatred of Cousins has clouded your ability to see things clearly.
Nothing confusing about it. We are on a time restriction with Cousin's playing out the last year of his deal with the Vikings unwilling to budge on the guaranteed money he wants in an extension. So do we simply let him play out the last year of his contract and let him walk for nothing at the end of the year, or do you recoup what you can now in a trade pre-draft and use the assets acquired to try to move up in the draft to land a young franchise QB? To me the latter makes much more sense. I like Kirk, I just don't like playing the contract/extension game with Kirk every offseason and understand his time is coming to an end, whether this year or next
I wouldn't be so sure about that. I think the team wants to see what he does in year two of the offense. And how he performs in '23 will dictate what happens with the contract.
Of course, if they have a chance to land a much younger, proven veteran like Lamar Jackson, they might just do that. And I would not be opposed to that at all. See, for me, it's not as much about the QB as it is about avoiding the crapshoot and getting a proven vet. I think any time you have a chance to get one--whether it's Cousins in '18 or Jackson in '23 or Brady in '21 or even Russell Wilson in '22--you gotta do that. But it's not going to be for a QB who's never played a down in the NFL. Unless someone has gone off the wails on a Kwesi twain. :-)
I think in that scenario you'd do the standard signing of a veteran in case the young guy needs some time. I'd be totally cool trading Cousins and getting off his cap hit, using draft capital acquired in said trade to move up and draft Levis (for example), and signing a guy like Matt Ryan who can start if Levis isn't ready immediately. At some point soon the Vikings are going to need to make a move at the QB position, its inevitable, and I think if you read between the lines at some things Kwesi has said regarding Cousins and the QB position, the Vikings are extremely interested in moving off Kirk's contract and his contract demands. I just don't think it makes a lot of sense to simply play out the last year of his contract and lose him for nothing or once again bend us over a barrel in contract negotiations. If he's not willing to accept a contract we are comfortable with and gives us some cap flexibility...see ya. You can't continue to allow Kirk to hold us hostage on these short deals with all this guaranteed money for a guy who arguably isn't even a top ten player at his position.
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
Nothing confusing about it. We are on a time restriction with Cousin's playing out the last year of his deal with the Vikings unwilling to budge on the guaranteed money he wants in an extension. So do we simply let him play out the last year of his contract and let him walk for nothing at the end of the year, or do you recoup what you can now in a trade pre-draft and use the assets acquired to try to move up in the draft to land a young franchise QB? To me the latter makes much more sense. I like Kirk, I just don't like playing the contract/extension game with Kirk every offseason and understand his time is coming to an end, whether this year or next
I also don’t agree that we are time restricted with
Cousins. I think we merely didn’t come
to terms before now. We can always sign
him to an extension at any point in time if we and he want to, most notably, if
we come out of the draft not finding the guy Kwesi wants or if we get half way
through the season and Cousins is crushing it.
Obviously it’s a two way street, and guys can get butt-hurt and want out
because of their feelings, but there aren’t a lot of places that Cousins can go
that are better than here in terms of supporting cast and having a coach that
will maximize his production, so if he can put his feelings aside (which it
feels like he does) they could still work something out.
Quote: @medaille said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Nothing confusing about it. We are on a time restriction with Cousin's playing out the last year of his deal with the Vikings unwilling to budge on the guaranteed money he wants in an extension. So do we simply let him play out the last year of his contract and let him walk for nothing at the end of the year, or do you recoup what you can now in a trade pre-draft and use the assets acquired to try to move up in the draft to land a young franchise QB? To me the latter makes much more sense. I like Kirk, I just don't like playing the contract/extension game with Kirk every offseason and understand his time is coming to an end, whether this year or next
I also don’t agree that we are time restricted with
Cousins. I think we merely didn’t come
to terms before now. We can always sign
him to an extension at any point in time if we and he want to, most notably, if
we come out of the draft not finding the guy Kwesi wants or if we get half way
through the season and Cousins is crushing it.
Obviously it’s a two way street, and guys can get butt-hurt and want out
because of their feelings, but there aren’t a lot of places that Cousins can go
that are better than here in terms of supporting cast and having a coach that
will maximize his production, so if he can put his feelings aside (which it
feels like he does) they could still work something out.
The question is do the Vikings even want him long term at 35 years old, and if so, will they blink on the guarantees he wants? It doesnt sound like that is the case. So if they can't come to an agreement on an extension this offseason, I fail to see the advantage in letting him play things out with the very real possibility he walks after the season regardless. Every indication is the Vikings would like to find a young QB to build around so trading him to the highest bidder makes sense. I tend to agree more with the Belichick philosophy in that if there is no intention to retain a player, trade them while they have trade value and you can get something back in return.
Sometimes you have to take a step back to be able to move forward. I am pretty convinced the teams best path forward comes from moving KC, even if his long term successor isn't in the mix yet.
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ supafreak84 said:
Again, if there is no intention to retain him on an extension past this upcoming season, the smart thing to do is to trade his ass. Sorry but we aren't going to the Super Bowl this upcoming season with or without Kirk Cousins (attention Wilf family!) Geoff thinks we can still get a late 1st round pick or some type of package of picks in trade compensation for Cousins, so how does that not make sense to do that? Yes, you are essentially sacrificing the upcoming season and yes the optics may look bad to Jefferson, but if there's a long term plan...do it! The Kirk Cousin hostage train is annoying every offseason. It's become the Minnesota version of Aaron Rodgers and if he is going to come back and play or not. As much as I like Kirk, it's time for this GM to step up to the plate and put his own stamp on the organization and I think even he knows that he can't do that as long as we keep playing the Cousins extension game.
Vikings are not going to trade their QB without first having their QBOTF in the pipeline.
And by what means would they go about acquiring a QBOTF prior to trading Cousins? I also think if that were to happen first it lowers the trade value and would give other teams leverage in trade talks. There's really just no way to finesse this Cousins situation to where the pieces line up perfectly for the Vikings. If they want off the rollercoaster they just need to jump at some point and trust in their new front office to make the right decisions in addressing the QB position.
By drafting one. Confused by the question.
No team would ever trade their perfectly good veteran QB for a draft pick. It would just never happen. Draft one, see what he's got, then trade? Sure. QB for QB, OK, but the QB has to be proven.
But QB for a rookie? Never happen. Not in a million years. Imagine the egg on the face of the GM of a 13-win team trading one of the NFL's best QBs, who's still only 34, for a draft pick that turns out to be Dwayne Haskins or Baker Mayfield or Sam Darnold or Josh Rosen or Trubisky or Wentz or Winston or Mariota, or Bortles, Manziel, Manuel, RGIII, Locker, Gabbert, Ponder.........No, it would never happen.
I think for some of you, your hatred of Cousins has clouded your ability to see things clearly.
Nothing confusing about it. We are on a time restriction with Cousin's playing out the last year of his deal with the Vikings unwilling to budge on the guaranteed money he wants in an extension. So do we simply let him play out the last year of his contract and let him walk for nothing at the end of the year, or do you recoup what you can now in a trade pre-draft and use the assets acquired to try to move up in the draft to land a young franchise QB? To me the latter makes much more sense. I like Kirk, I just don't like playing the contract/extension game with Kirk every offseason and understand his time is coming to an end, whether this year or next
I wouldn't be so sure about that. I think the team wants to see what he does in year two of the offense. And how he performs in '23 will dictate what happens with the contract.
Of course, if they have a chance to land a much younger, proven veteran like Lamar Jackson, they might just do that. And I would not be opposed to that at all. See, for me, it's not as much about the QB as it is about avoiding the crapshoot and getting a proven vet. I think any time you have a chance to get one--whether it's Cousins in '18 or Jackson in '23 or Brady in '21 or even Russell Wilson in '22--you gotta do that. But it's not going to be for a QB who's never played a down in the NFL. Unless someone has gone off the wails on a Kwesi twain. :-)
I think in that scenario you'd do the standard signing of a veteran in case the young guy needs some time. I'd be totally cool trading Cousins and getting off his cap hit, using draft capital acquired in said trade to move up and draft Levis (for example), and signing a guy like Matt Ryan who can start if Levis isn't ready immediately. At some point soon the Vikings are going to need to make a move at the QB position, its inevitable, and I think if you read between the lines at some things Kwesi has said regarding Cousins and the QB position, the Vikings are extremely interested in moving off Kirk's contract and his contract demands. I just don't think it makes a lot of sense to simply play out the last year of his contract and lose him for nothing or once again bend us over a barrel in contract negotiations. If he's not willing to accept a contract we are comfortable with and gives us some cap flexibility...see ya. You can't continue to allow Kirk to hold us hostage on these short deals with all this guaranteed money for a guy who arguably isn't even a top ten player at his position.
First, you have to be insane to pay Ryan more than a buck fifty to take a space in your locker room. The guy is completely spent as is done! Second, Kirk was clearly at top 10 QB last yr. with a 31st rated defense. That's just fact. That said, we should be looking to draft a QB with hopes for the future. It might take this year and or next. I think Kwesi is showing his immaturity in dealing with Kirk based on Kirk's track record. A lower than top 8 salary guaranteed for 3 yrs. should be a lock while we get our QB of the future trained.
|
