Schefter reporting Vikings looking to do Cousins extension now

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"Knucklehead" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

I have no idea what this even means. 

im not sure how to explain it much easier.  when you decide to rebuild the roster,  then do it all in,  admit you are likely not going to be competitive for a couple years,  identify who on your roster will be past their prime and not worth paying high dollar contracts to for the next couple years while you rebuild,  and trade them for either draft picks or younger players that will help your roster once you have finished your rebuild.  take the cap savings from those veterans that you traded for picks or younger players and use that to lock up the young studs you have and want to retain.  you will be picking lower in the draft so you have more options and value and should be able to help you get the players you want as opposed to picking 23,  really wanting a QB,  but knowing you dont have near the draft capital necessary to move into the top 3 to get your man.

And the most likely outcome of a rebuild? Another one.

As opposed to what we've been doing drafting between 10 and 25 for the better part of 50 years....some times a couple spots better,  sometimes worse.  This half way in half way out rebuild on the run hasn't worked yet either.

Because it worked so well when the Browns and the Bears and the Jets and the Commies and the Texans and the Lions rebuilt with all their top 10 picks?
Just since 2000, the Browns have had 12 picks in the top 10. The Bears have had 8. The Jets 12. The Commies 8. The Texans 9. The Lions 14. That’s 73 top 10 picks. None of those 73 picks got any of those teams even close to a Lombardi.  

These teams have been “rebuilding” for decades. The problem? The QB. It’s always about the QB. Oh but unlike those teams the Vikings are going to blow it all up and instead drafting Wilson or Lance or Baker or Trubisky or Wentz or Winston or Mariota or Bortles or RGIII or Locker or Gabbert or Bradford or Sanchez or Jamarcus or Young or Leinart or Carr or Harrington, we’re going to hit on our first try. 

LOVE the optimism, but the Vikings are far more likely to win a Super Bowl in the next few years with their veteran QB than by jumping into a never-ending series of rebuilds with the aforementioned results. 

What’s more, look at who’s winning Super Bowls. KC didn’t rebuild. They were a playoff team with the 27th pick in the draft when they traded up for Mahomes. Rams didn’t. They brought in a vet. Bucs didn’t. They brought in a vet. New England, Denver…all of these teams won with older, veteran QBs. The Eagles are getting close. But they didn't tank and rebuild either. Hurts was a 2nd round pick by a team coming off two straight 9-7 seasons when they drafted him. Half way in half way out. 
So who are all these teams tanking, rebuilding and winning Super Bowls? 

Those teams made the decision that they stood a better chance of winning a SB by replacing their existing QB. I hope that the Vikes do win a SB w/ Kirko, but after 5 years w/ only a single playoff win to show for it, the record shows that it's time for a change.

And every single one of them were proven wrong. And more than a couple times. What's more, none of them had a QB nearly as good as Cousins when they did it.

@"Waterboy" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: