49er's pushing hard to trade for Kirk Cousins

@"Wetlander" said:

@"Vanguard83" said: maybe ask yourself, If Cousins such a liability at QB....why would SF want him?

Are Lynch and the niners TRYING to be mediocre?

The issue with  Cousins isnt his play...its his PAY

For me...  it's a little bit of both.  I'm not going to argue that he didn't play well during the last 10 games of the season (he did).  However, it seems like we're all back to excusing his brutally awful play from the first 6 games of the year. 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"Wetlander" said:

@"Vanguard83" said: maybe ask yourself, If Cousins such a liability at QB....why would SF want him?

Are Lynch and the niners TRYING to be mediocre?

The issue with  Cousins isnt his play...its his PAY

For me...  it's a little bit of both.  I'm not going to argue that he didn't play well during the last 10 games of the season (he did).  However, it seems like we're all back to excusing his brutally awful play from the first 6 games of the year. 

I trade Cousins for no man....not named DeShaun. But don't think that's not in the back of Rick's head right now. You dangle Dalvin and Da Griddy in front of DeShaun you might convince him to play one-team hardball with Houston.

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"Wetlander" said:

@"Vanguard83" said: maybe ask yourself, If Cousins such a liability at QB....why would SF want him?

Are Lynch and the niners TRYING to be mediocre?

The issue with  Cousins isnt his play...its his PAY

For me...  it's a little bit of both.  I'm not going to argue that he didn't play well during the last 10 games of the season (he did).  However, it seems like we're all back to excusing his brutally awful play from the first 6 games of the year. 

But don't you have to ask why? Don't you have to acknowledge that whatever was causing the problem with Cousins early on was largely solved? No doubt he played great the last 10 games. He also played great last year. So why did he start out this year so poorly? I have no idea. But I suspect the team does. Could've been anything: an adjustment to changes Kubiak made, line calls, protections, stems, drops. Remember, there was no preseason.

It would be different if he played well, then like crap, then well again, then like crap. But you can pretty much divide bad Kirk and good Kirk at the bye.  And I use "pretty much"  loosely because I'm talking generally. 

I trade Cousins for no man....not named DeShaun. But don't think that's not in the back of Rick's head right now. You dangle Dalvin and Da Griddy in front of DeShaun you might convince him to play one-team hardball with Houston.

@"Skodin" said:

It's pressure, he's wound too tight, too analytical.  It crumbles around him and I haven't seen the team do much in response to his crumbling except join him in it.

Spielman had cap room and a weird mess at the QB position post a 13-3 year.  I do not blame him for going after Cousins, on paper, he's perfect for Minnesota.  But that's the problem, he kind of resembles everything Minnesota, which doesn't equate to championships.

He played very well in the Saints game, but I am confident that we will look back at that game as his best and biggest moment.  That's great for him personally but this franchise has been focused on winning a super bowl and that is not good enough.

@"medaille" said:

@"Skodin" said:

It's pressure, he's wound too tight, too analytical.  It crumbles around him and I haven't seen the team do much in response to his crumbling except join him in it.

Spielman had cap room and a weird mess at the QB position post a 13-3 year.  I do not blame him for going after Cousins, on paper, he's perfect for Minnesota.  But that's the problem, he kind of resembles everything Minnesota, which doesn't equate to championships.

He played very well in the Saints game, but I am confident that we will look back at that game as his best and biggest moment.  That's great for him personally but this franchise has been focused on winning a super bowl and that is not good enough.

I think the run first game plan that everyone loves to complain about is there to take a lot of the pressure off his shoulders, ease him into the game and put him in the Play Action framework that he excels at.  I think if you put him into a pass to open up the run type of "modern" offense, that a lot of people are clamoring for, we'd see his limitations more aggressively.

I like Kirk, but not at the cap hit its going to cost over the next two seasons and then where are we at? What's the plan after that? I was just looking at the listing of starting QB's in this league and I can count 11 guys that are no brainer better players and about 4 or 5 you could make an argument for.  Kirk is a middle of the road, solid QB, who was probably the worst QB in the league through week seven this season and on the verge of being benched. 

If you tell me right now the 49ers give us Garopollo and the 12th pick (Kyle Pitts?) in any package for Kirk on top of the cap money saved over the next two seasons....that would be a tough deal to pass up

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@"Jor-El" said:

@"MarkSP18" said:

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@"MarkSP18" said:

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@"PurpleCrush" said:

@"Geoff Nichols" said: I will put it to rest. The Vikings have absolutely zero interest in trading Kirk Cousins. It doesn't matter if the 49ers want him, he isn't available. I also feel very confident that the 49ers would not offer the 12th pick straight up with Kirk. 

Well, I guess that's that. Geoff, let me ask you this...what's the general consensus inside the building regarding Cousins (meaning from management, coaches, players)? Is it mostly positive, and does the team believe Cousins is the guy to take them to a Super Bowl?

Depends who you ask. Nobody thinks Kirk is perfect, he isn't. But he didn't limit the team this season. Injuries and flawed personnel on the defensive side did. 

So while you can probably do better than Kirk you probably need to run it back with him to see what happens this season. So while I heard they have no interest in trading him maybe seeing what the Rams offered opened a slight door for someone to feel desperate? But at the end of the day trading Kirk creates more problems than it solves. Top 5 QBs never come available, top 10 QBs hardly come available, and top 15 QBs move once and awhile. 

Aside from Spielman/Zimmer needing a strong season I don't think the Wilf's would be thrilled to get the call suggesting they sunk $45M into a single season (2020) of Kirk Cousins. 

While the Vikings did redo Cousins' deal prior to this season, he had 30 mil coming no matter what.

So they really did NOT sink 45M into Cousins in 2020.  They gave him an extra 10 mil so far.

In 3 years, Cousins has received 94M from the Vikings which is 31.333M per year and not really that much.

The Wilfs received 255M in revenue sharing in 2017.
They received 274.3M in revenue sharing in 2018. 
They received 296M in revenue sharing in 2019. 

They also had gate receipts and other revenue.

It is doubtful that they have to spend too much of their own money anymore and the value of the team has skyrocketed.

Worrying about the Wilfs paying players who then leave should be the least of anyone's worry.

They literally paid him $40M in cash last year, that is what Kirk took to the bank. The signing bonus is a single check and not deferred in this case. The $94M over 3 is right. But is bad business and a competitive disadvantage to deal Kirk. Not saying they can't choke down the money, they can. But it kills trust with the owners and there is no reason to have effectively paid $20M for Kirk to be elsewhere unless you're getting a significantly better QB.  

That sounds reasonable but the fact remains the money is not coming out their pockets due to the revenue sharing and other revenue they received.

If they did trade Cousins now, it would be because they do not want to extend him again after this deal and do not want to try and absorb that $45M cap hit in 2022 that they created for themselves.

Extending past 2022 when he will be 35 when the 2023 season starts is extremely foolish.  There is no chance he gets any better and it is more likely he gets even less mobile than he is now (which is pretty awful actually).  Cousins has been very fortunate to avoid injury as well.  How long can that keep up?  Knock on wood.

Taking a $20M dead money cap hit is not a big deal when you realize you save $45M in cap space in 2022 and $11M in cap space in 2021.

In the end, paying Cousins $94M over three years is not exorbitant.  That is the final arbiter.  How they divvied it up is irrelevant.

I mean they gave him $26M in cash his first year and $28M in cash his second year.

You are now saying that because they gave him $40M in cash his third year they would not be happy if he was moved.

But nothing was said about the cash layout those first two years.  Interesting.

Is the idea the Wilfs would "not be happy if he was moved" after paying x dollars just about money spent - or about the idea that they were assured by Spielman that Cousins is "the guy", and would dislike another change in direction? 

Probably a blend of both. The Wilfs preach stability and continuity. So after going through a tumultuous period after Bridgewater they convinced ownership that Kirk was the guy. Now you're going back to them to advocate for a change? If you have a through plan of how you are going to improve the QB position, then I get it. But I don't see why the Wilfs would sign off on trading Kirk just to add some draft picks and a worse QB. At this point Spielman/Zimmer won't be choosing the next QB. That could change but I am pretty sure Kirk, Zimmer, and Spielman are all tied together to varying degrees. 

In my opinion, trading away Cousins for any scenario that doesn’t involve Watson as our new QB is a terrible idea. Jimmy G isn’t nearly as good as Cousins, which is why San Fran would love to have him. Setting aside the serious injury problems for Jimmy, his play is more erratic than Cousins. 
Cousins is one of the best QB’s in the league and the Vikings are lucky to have him. He’s severely underrated by many of our fans. We lost vital starters on defense this year right out of the gate with Pierce and Hunter. Losing Hunter in a year where we had just let our second best pass rusher walk hurt doubly so. We have the offensive weapons and QB in place. This could be a championship team. They just need a much improved pass rush (which is attainable with our current roster healthy) and a little line help on O and they are competitive. 
Watson has a surprisingly decent contract in place. If something could be worked out, it makes sense. Otherwise, short of Rogers coming available, there isn’t another QB out there better than Cousins. He easily has 5 plus years left the way it’s going. He’s a tough dude and durable. That alone is hard to find. 
The only issue with Kirk is his contract. Personally, I’ve seen enough to offer him a longer term deal that is more cap friendly. It would require real commitment though. I’d be confident I could win a title with the guy if I took care to build a complete team around the him. 
Watson or long term commitment (with a more cap friendly contract) to Cousins would be my play. 

@"Vikergirl" said:

I agree if we are not going after Watson forget trading Kirk.

@"Wetlander" said:

@"Vanguard83" said: maybe ask yourself, If Cousins such a liability at QB....why would SF want him?

Are Lynch and the niners TRYING to be mediocre?

The issue with  Cousins isnt his play...its his PAY

For me...  it's a little bit of both.  I'm not going to argue that he didn't play well during the last 10 games of the season (he did).  However, it seems like we're all back to excusing his brutally awful play from the first 6 games of the year.  He singlehandedly lost us the games against Green Bay, Indianapolis, and Atlanta.  Those 3 games combined with some tough last second losses during a 1-5 start basically set the tone for the rest of the season.  Great he played well when there was no pressure and little chance at the playoffs...  think about how much different the season could have been if we had started 3-3 with a really tough opening schedule?  I say this as a fan that was ecstatic when we got Kirk.  I guess now seeing him up close and personal for 3 seasons, I'm starting to see why Washington moved on.

He's a good, not great QB that has too many stretches of bad play.  Yes, even the elite guys like Rodgers, Brady, Wilson, etc. throw up some duds in awhile, but it's much less than Kirk and it doesn't prevent their team from making the playoffs or going on a Super Bowl run.

Add in the fact that Kirk is doing is no favors with what are essentially fully guaranteed deals...  Yeah, he's not being paid an exorbitant amount compared to other QBs (right in line with other guys) but he's not as good as the elite guys and he isn't giving us any cap flexibility by adding extra years with little to no dead money on them where we can be flexible with the cap in future years.  Need an example?  This last 2 year extension freed up what...  10 million in cap space, but we had to push his cap hit through the rough on those two years.  So we got a little short term relief, but not future relief without adding more guaranteed years when we're in the same situation heading into the 2022 season.

That's where I'm coming from...  honestly, I'd be fine keeping Kirk if he'd drop the mercenary attitude and let the Vikings structure his contract like they have done so successfully in the past (i.e. pay guys top 5 at their position in the first 3 years and leave room to extend or bump their pay in Year 4 or 5 if they've outperformed their contract).  The fact that he won't and his play isn't top 5 at his position...  I can see why fans are ready to move on and try a cost controlled rookie.

Just my two cents on this topic since it seems to be dominating the board.

@"Skodin" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"Wetlander" said:

@"Vanguard83" said: maybe ask yourself, If Cousins such a liability at QB....why would SF want him?

Are Lynch and the niners TRYING to be mediocre?

The issue with  Cousins isnt his play...its his PAY

For me...  it's a little bit of both.  I'm not going to argue that he didn't play well during the last 10 games of the season (he did).  However, it seems like we're all back to excusing his brutally awful play from the first 6 games of the year. 

But don't you have to ask why? Don't you have to acknowledge that whatever was causing the problem with Cousins early on was largely solved? No doubt he played great the last 10 games. He also played great last year. So why did he start out this year so poorly? I have no idea. But I suspect the team does. Could've been anything: an adjustment to changes Kubiak made, line calls, protections, stems, drops. Remember, there was no preseason.

It would be different if he played well, then like crap, then well again, then like crap. But you can pretty much divide bad Kirk and good Kirk at the bye.  And I use "pretty much"  loosely because I'm talking generally. 

I trade Cousins for no man....not named DeShaun. But don't think that's not in the back of Rick's head right now. You dangle Dalvin and Da Griddy in front of DeShaun you might convince him to play one-team hardball with Houston.

It's pressure, he's wound too tight, too analytical.  It crumbles around him and I haven't seen the team do much in response to his crumbling except join him in it.

@"Wetlander" said:

@"Vanguard83" said: maybe ask yourself, If Cousins such a liability at QB....why would SF want him?

Are Lynch and the niners TRYING to be mediocre?

The issue with  Cousins isnt his play...its his PAY

For me...  it's a little bit of both.  I'm not going to argue that he didn't play well during the last 10 games of the season (he did).  However, it seems like we're all back to excusing his brutally awful play from the first 6 games of the year.  He singlehandedly lost us the games against Green Bay, Indianapolis, and Atlanta.  Those 3 games combined with some tough last second losses during a 1-5 start basically set the tone for the rest of the season.  Great he played well when there was no pressure and little chance at the playoffs...  think about how much different the season could have been if we had started 3-3 with a really tough opening schedule?  I say this as a fan that was ecstatic when we got Kirk.  I guess now seeing him up close and personal for 3 seasons, I'm starting to see why Washington moved on.

He's a good, not great QB that has too many stretches of bad play.  Yes, even the elite guys like Rodgers, Brady, Wilson, etc. throw up some duds in awhile, but it's much less than Kirk and it doesn't prevent their team from making the playoffs or going on a Super Bowl run.

Add in the fact that Kirk is doing is no favors with what are essentially fully guaranteed deals...  Yeah, he's not being paid an exorbitant amount compared to other QBs (right in line with other guys) but he's not as good as the elite guys and he isn't giving us any cap flexibility by adding extra years with little to no dead money on them where we can be flexible with the cap in future years.  Need an example?  This last 2 year extension freed up what...  10 million in cap space, but we had to push his cap hit through the rough on those two years.  So we got a little short term relief, but not future relief without adding more guaranteed years when we're in the same situation heading into the 2022 season.

That's where I'm coming from...  honestly, I'd be fine keeping Kirk if he'd drop the mercenary attitude and let the Vikings structure his contract like they have done so successfully in the past (i.e. pay guys top 5 at their position in the first 3 years and leave room to extend or bump their pay in Year 4 or 5 if they've outperformed their contract).  The fact that he won't and his play isn't top 5 at his position...  I can see why fans are ready to move on and try a cost controlled rookie.

Just my two cents on this topic since it seems to be dominating the board.

@"Jor-El" said:

@"Wetlander" said:

@"Vanguard83" said: maybe ask yourself, If Cousins such a liability at QB....why would SF want him?

Are Lynch and the niners TRYING to be mediocre?

The issue with  Cousins isnt his play...its his PAY

For me...  it's a little bit of both.  I'm not going to argue that he didn't play well during the last 10 games of the season (he did).  However, it seems like we're all back to excusing his brutally awful play from the first 6 games of the year.  He singlehandedly lost us the games against Green Bay, Indianapolis, and Atlanta.  Those 3 games combined with some tough last second losses during a 1-5 start basically set the tone for the rest of the season.  Great he played well when there was no pressure and little chance at the playoffs...  think about how much different the season could have been if we had started 3-3 with a really tough opening schedule?  I say this as a fan that was ecstatic when we got Kirk.  I guess now seeing him up close and personal for 3 seasons, I'm starting to see why Washington moved on.

He's a good, not great QB that has too many stretches of bad play.  Yes, even the elite guys like Rodgers, Brady, Wilson, etc. throw up some duds in awhile, but it's much less than Kirk and it doesn't prevent their team from making the playoffs or going on a Super Bowl run.

Add in the fact that Kirk is doing is no favors with what are essentially fully guaranteed deals...  Yeah, he's not being paid an exorbitant amount compared to other QBs (right in line with other guys) but he's not as good as the elite guys and he isn't giving us any cap flexibility by adding extra years with little to no dead money on them where we can be flexible with the cap in future years.  Need an example?  This last 2 year extension freed up what...  10 million in cap space, but we had to push his cap hit through the rough on those two years.  So we got a little short term relief, but not future relief without adding more guaranteed years when we're in the same situation heading into the 2022 season.

That's where I'm coming from...  honestly, I'd be fine keeping Kirk if he'd drop the mercenary attitude and let the Vikings structure his contract like they have done so successfully in the past (i.e. pay guys top 5 at their position in the first 3 years and leave room to extend or bump their pay in Year 4 or 5 if they've outperformed their contract).  The fact that he won't and his play isn't top 5 at his position...  I can see why fans are ready to move on and try a cost controlled rookie.

Just my two cents on this topic since it seems to be dominating the board.

First, you are completely right to remind everyone he was terrible at the beginning of the season. I would argue he was nearly as bad for a stretch early in 2019. We've had a couple years where there was talk of literally waiving Cousins midway through the season, people swearing they are convinced he is a flop, but then he gets hot and a month after the season ends, everyone just reads his stats and convinces themselves he is worth a couple of first-round picks.

But regarding the idea Cousins should take a pay cut voluntarily...OK, it would be nice for the team, but from Cousins' perspective: why would he?? 

Hey, I want the Vikings to get a championship, I really do. But some people act like the players should make sacrifices "for a cause". Come on, they are not fighting Al Qaeda. The NFL is a big entertainment industry, and it's healthier to think of it that way. How often do you hear of a star actor reducing their salary so another actor can be hired to join a film or show? It's the same thing. 

These athletes all won a lottery ticket in getting big NFL contracts. Some of them are stupid and don't realize it, and think the money will continue forever. Cousins doesn't seem to fall into that category.

Also, Cousins was "mercenary" in Washington: he refused to sign contracts and forced the team to franchise him twice. He wanted a large, fully guaranteed contract when he left Washington - and the Vikings management gave it to him. They knew exactly what his motivations were before signing Cousins, and they also gave him the current contract extension many people are mad about. Why do so many people sing the praises of Brez and Spielman when they squeeze an extra million of cap space by pushing dead money into the future, but when they dislike the contract Vikings management gave Cousins, it's his fault for "being mercenary"?

Fans quickly forget how badly he plays at times, but the Vikings management is just as oblivious. 

@ Jor-el....

Who said anything about a pay cut?  If I read my post, I simply said I think Kirk could do more to help the Vikings manage their cap, not get paid less.  The Vikings have been masters of signing or extending guys like Everson, Linval, Rhodes, Harry, Diggs, etc where the AAV is in the top 5 of their position, but the player gets guarantees in the first 3 years that pay them at or near the top of their position.  It allows the player to get paid market value in the first 3 years of the deal, but helps spread the cap hits and dead money over 4 or 5 years.  Then the Vikings can easily redo their contract at Year 3 or 4 if they have outperformed it (or other similar players are getting paid more) and can guarantee more money upfront in an extension because the cap hit isn't prohibitive.

All I'm saying is these short 2-3 year fully guaranteed deals hurt the Vikings cap flexibility.  Geoff pointed out earlier that some of the moves the Vikings made impacted the cap this year (it's true), but you also have to look at the impact of Kirk's contract on the cap.  If he would have initially signed a 5 year deal with his guarantees paid out in the first 3 years (paid the same as what he's gotten already), we would have had more flexibility to move money around with a new extension...  Pay him market value, but lower his cap hits and create more space in future years.  But since he didn't... We were forced to add two more fully guaranteed years to create some short term cap space and have some much larger cap hits in 2022 and 2023 instead.

Make sense?

For what it's worth, if we don't trade him, I expect his next extension to include a few voidable years, which are handy for aging players. The other side of that argument is that he's almost never hurt, which makes him seem like the kind of player who could feasibly play another 4-6 years without decline. 

@"comet52" said:

@"Jor-El" said:

@"Wetlander" said:

@"Vanguard83" said: maybe ask yourself, If Cousins such a liability at QB....why would SF want him?

Are Lynch and the niners TRYING to be mediocre?

The issue with  Cousins isnt his play...its his PAY

For me...  it's a little bit of both.  I'm not going to argue that he didn't play well during the last 10 games of the season (he did).  However, it seems like we're all back to excusing his brutally awful play from the first 6 games of the year.  He singlehandedly lost us the games against Green Bay, Indianapolis, and Atlanta.  Those 3 games combined with some tough last second losses during a 1-5 start basically set the tone for the rest of the season.  Great he played well when there was no pressure and little chance at the playoffs...  think about how much different the season could have been if we had started 3-3 with a really tough opening schedule?  I say this as a fan that was ecstatic when we got Kirk.  I guess now seeing him up close and personal for 3 seasons, I'm starting to see why Washington moved on.

He's a good, not great QB that has too many stretches of bad play.  Yes, even the elite guys like Rodgers, Brady, Wilson, etc. throw up some duds in awhile, but it's much less than Kirk and it doesn't prevent their team from making the playoffs or going on a Super Bowl run.

Add in the fact that Kirk is doing is no favors with what are essentially fully guaranteed deals...  Yeah, he's not being paid an exorbitant amount compared to other QBs (right in line with other guys) but he's not as good as the elite guys and he isn't giving us any cap flexibility by adding extra years with little to no dead money on them where we can be flexible with the cap in future years.  Need an example?  This last 2 year extension freed up what...  10 million in cap space, but we had to push his cap hit through the rough on those two years.  So we got a little short term relief, but not future relief without adding more guaranteed years when we're in the same situation heading into the 2022 season.

That's where I'm coming from...  honestly, I'd be fine keeping Kirk if he'd drop the mercenary attitude and let the Vikings structure his contract like they have done so successfully in the past (i.e. pay guys top 5 at their position in the first 3 years and leave room to extend or bump their pay in Year 4 or 5 if they've outperformed their contract).  The fact that he won't and his play isn't top 5 at his position...  I can see why fans are ready to move on and try a cost controlled rookie.

Just my two cents on this topic since it seems to be dominating the board.

First, you are completely right to remind everyone he was terrible at the beginning of the season. I would argue he was nearly as bad for a stretch early in 2019. We've had a couple years where there was talk of literally waiving Cousins midway through the season, people swearing they are convinced he is a flop, but then he gets hot and a month after the season ends, everyone just reads his stats and convinces themselves he is worth a couple of first-round picks.

But regarding the idea Cousins should take a pay cut voluntarily...OK, it would be nice for the team, but from Cousins' perspective: why would he?? 

Hey, I want the Vikings to get a championship, I really do. But some people act like the players should make sacrifices "for a cause". Come on, they are not fighting Al Qaeda. The NFL is a big entertainment industry, and it's healthier to think of it that way. How often do you hear of a star actor reducing their salary so another actor can be hired to join a film or show? It's the same thing. 

These athletes all won a lottery ticket in getting big NFL contracts. Some of them are stupid and don't realize it, and think the money will continue forever. Cousins doesn't seem to fall into that category.

Also, Cousins was "mercenary" in Washington: he refused to sign contracts and forced the team to franchise him twice. He wanted a large, fully guaranteed contract when he left Washington - and the Vikings management gave it to him. They knew exactly what his motivations were before signing Cousins, and they also gave him the current contract extension many people are mad about. Why do so many people sing the praises of Brez and Spielman when they squeeze an extra million of cap space by pushing dead money into the future, but when they dislike the contract Vikings management gave Cousins, it's his fault for "being mercenary"?

Fans quickly forget how badly he plays at times, but the Vikings management is just as oblivious. 

Yup.  Paycuts, lol.  Where do people get that from?  Tom Brady, the goat with a billionaire wife?  What NFL players are taking pay cuts voluntarily?  What NFL agents are calling a g.m. and going "Hey my guy wants a pay..." and the g.m.cuts him off and says "Raise?" And the agent is like, "No, a CUT!"

Then they both have a good laugh, ask how the family is doing, etc. and hang up.

@"MaroonBells" said: For what it's worth, if we don't trade him, I expect his next extension to include a few voidable years, which are handy for aging players. The other side of that argument is that he's almost never hurt, which makes him seem like the kind of player who could feasibly play another 4-6 years without decline. 

I think Cousins likes these short fully guaranteed deals and I don't see it changing.  

@"Wetlander" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: For what it's worth, if we don't trade him, I expect his next extension to include a few voidable years, which are handy for aging players. The other side of that argument is that he's almost never hurt, which makes him seem like the kind of player who could feasibly play another 4-6 years without decline. 

I don't think it will...  Cousins bent Washington over playing on the franchise tag because he didn't feel the love from them.  Then the Vikings showed him the love by giving him an essentially fully guaranteed 3 year deal.  This past off-season, he could have easily asked for a longer extension with some fluff years tacked on to help the Vikings out with their cap after we showed him the love, but he didn't...  he wanted another 2 year extension that became fully guaranteed within days after the end of his original 3 year deal.

I think Cousins likes these short fully guaranteed deals and I don't see it changing.