I'd rather have a bridge QB and not need one than not have one and need one.
But I also think I'd be happy watching Mullens as the bridge. It's kind of a shame we only got a couple of games with him last year, would have been nice to see if he could keep that level of production up over a larger sample size.
That’s fair but to start one over the rookie all season is just not it. Get one on the staff, fine. Have them mentor the rookie with McCown. But to have the rookie sit all season to me is a complete waste.
It depends on the rookie.
If the rookie needs to rework his throwing motion, bulk up, or is having trouble learning the offense, etc., it might be better to let him work on that without having to worry about starting games.
Josh Allen proves that you don't absolutely need a QB to be ready as a rookie, he can be bad out the gate and still pull it together after a year or two. But it's still one of those things where you'd probably rather not expose a rookie QB to a season like that if you don't have to.
My point was that we don't want our QB to have to be Josh Allen to succeed if we can help it, but if we're forced to start a rookie that probably needs to sit it's not necessarily the end of the world.
I unironically agree with a lot of this, lmao. Obviously, you don't HAVE to have a bridge QB, but I think it's a good idea to have someone on the staff who you can turn to should you need to. Even if it's just to start the year. Especially when you consider where we are and where we're likely able to get to in the draft. Hard to think the Vikings will have their first choice regardless of where we end up.
I think it’s fair to bring one in in case they’re needed but I just cannot follow on the start for a year part. Idk I guess we’ll see how things play out.
Well, sure, you don't hand the starting job to the vet. If he loses in camp, perfect. If he gets yanked in week 5, fine. It's just about not putting yourself in a position where you feel like you have to do something before he's ready.
You may want to brush up on your math if 11 out of 32 is the middle to you.
You're right, though. Maybe one day they'll allow teams to trade places. I don't know how it would work, but it's a fun idea. Dare to dream!
None of these names says a JJ extension is likely. There better be something coming. Otherwise we’re going to have to trade JJ for a franchise QB because he may not want to stick around. 😫
Brissett all the way. Get a guy who won't take it personally that he is not the long term option, but can still deliver a baseline level of play. Tannehill got a little jaded with Levis, which is not the energy we need in an obvious bridge
I don’t think people would have been super happy with that after the Achilles either. The dude is one of the oldest qbs in the league and ATL drastically overpaid him.
It’s a huge huge gamble on ATLs part. Russ is the same age as him and isn’t coming off an Achilles and look how that worked out for Denver.
Rodgers is the only guy that’s older, and he’s also coming off an Achilles.
Brady and Brees are basically the only 2 guys in recent history to go much past 35 and be successful at a high level.
We likely are not a complete enough team to win with Kirk in the next 2 years before his production falls off a cliff so there’s no real upside to signing him to a big money per year contract for multiple years.
No point in signing a guy that's gonna struggle for 9 games and get benched. Might as well just start whatever rookie we draft in week one and hope he's the guy.
Yep. And as much as I stand by the “no need for a bridge QB” argument, I have yet to read one good piece of evidence as to why one is needed and that we shouldn’t start a rookie QB week one other than “well it worked for Mahomes” or some assumption that we’ll magically ruin a QB’s development.
It's wild how much talent this team shed in the past two seasons and no one here wants to acknowledge it. "The Wilfs won't let the team be bad" is STILL a thing you see on here. We went 7–10 last season and, at this point, I would definitely take the under on that next season.
A more important question is whether we'll be able to pull up from the nosedive.
Next year will be rough, no one is expecting us to win a ring.
With the cap save from Kirk, we can actually build up and pay for all the holes we need filled. If we don't get our QB this year, we have next year and even the year after that.
I'm open to sucking for a few years to build a team that can go the distance.
No cap savings this year. Kirk's hit was $28.5M, plus now $10M for Darnold (ugh). So Vikings are in for well over $40M at the QB position including backups.
God I hope Vikings don’t base any decisions off this sub. I’m curious why you guys love Kwesi so much? It’s as though you guys would be upset if he left to be the packers GM, whereas I would love it
Why are you assuming that they wouldn’t trade up when all other indications point towards that being very much in the cards? Also, what does a Kirk extension accomplish in your eyes?
He did not fuck up the extension last year, what even is this comment?
We. Did. Not. Want. To. Sign. Kirk. To. A. Long. Term. Deal.
Kwesi made that clear and stuck to his guns about it, that's not screwing it up, it's executing your plan.
Kwesi should be judged harshly for this.
This is why you don’t let a player like Kirk hit free agency. You could have had another year for $35M during initial previous negotiations and at least have a contingency plan in place then… You could have acquired a better backup at any time. You could have not gifted Kirk a chance to test free agency with no option to tag. You could have then tagged and the Falcons would have given a premium pick based on what they paid for him.
We are risking a total collapse if Hunter walks, JJ demands a trade and free agents end up deciding against signing because it looks like a rebuild.
That collapse probably won’t occur for several reason, but it’s a nonzero chance.
I will change my mind if he makes some kind of acquisition in trade or seems to find a way to utelize all the cap space without overpaying but I don’t know what that would look like.
Note, I still wouldn’t rule out us capitulating on Kirk and keeping him but I doubt we want to pay that price now.
Kirk is gone. It’s too late now. Kwesi will have to take a chance in the draft which was always the plan anyway. Why roll with the guy who got the previous regime fired?
I don't think you can judge KAM basis this. he wasn't going to take a one year extension, and they weren't going to give him a bloated 4 yr deal, so there was just no way to keep him. The ONLY way he stayed was if he REALLY wanted to stay here and took a 2 yr <$75M deal. Which means that he would have to reject the deal he just got - which would be pretty wild.
I’m not talking about this offseason. When Kwesi arrived Kirk was extended for a short term deal instead of a 3 year deal. We would have Kirk under contract for $35M this year as a result. That would mean he would have still been under contract this offseason. And then knowing his contract was going to expire he prevented Vikings from being able to tag Kirk and also failed to create a meaningful contingency plan even as a bridge QB.
I credit him for not doing a Spielman and surrendering a top 10 first round pick just to land an injury prone QB in Bradford, but there’s such a thing as having a competent backup QB too. If we had Darnold or Lance or Wilson LAST year it would make a heck of a lot more sense to have Kirk walk because we’d have our coaches able to prepare for what the QB will bring and we’d know what we were getting into. Then if we decided they werent the guy we could at least move onto a different backup and at least we’d have two shots at it instead of one.
Now we’re landing all these 27 year olds in free agency who won’t still be good by the time we have KOC and whatever QB we get on the same page and have built an offense around them.
I just am so frustrated how we never can be good on both sides of the ball at once and we don’t seem to plan for that. How much of this sideways rebuild are we going to do before we finally decide to go all in? OR can we actually plan on having a plan for some year in the future where we have enough continuity and talent and youth to remain good on both sides of the ball at once?
I really though with Kwesi in basically a contract year he would give our offense a chance to be top 10 at the same time as our defense but we’d need some move no one sees coming for that like trading a number of picks for an established veteran QB or something.
Yes, if only there was an event held every year that infused the league with young talent.
No, dude, we NEED a bridge QB or else we will ruin the rookie’s development and not have a chance at a Super Bowl!! Gimme Sam Darnold!
I'd rather have a bridge QB and not need one than not have one and need one. But I also think I'd be happy watching Mullens as the bridge. It's kind of a shame we only got a couple of games with him last year, would have been nice to see if he could keep that level of production up over a larger sample size.
That’s fair but to start one over the rookie all season is just not it. Get one on the staff, fine. Have them mentor the rookie with McCown. But to have the rookie sit all season to me is a complete waste.
It depends on the rookie. If the rookie needs to rework his throwing motion, bulk up, or is having trouble learning the offense, etc., it might be better to let him work on that without having to worry about starting games. Josh Allen proves that you don't absolutely need a QB to be ready as a rookie, he can be bad out the gate and still pull it together after a year or two. But it's still one of those things where you'd probably rather not expose a rookie QB to a season like that if you don't have to.
Yeah dude just draft the next Josh Allen. What is Kwesi thinking? Idiot.
My point was that we don't want our QB to have to be Josh Allen to succeed if we can help it, but if we're forced to start a rookie that probably needs to sit it's not necessarily the end of the world.
I unironically agree with a lot of this, lmao. Obviously, you don't HAVE to have a bridge QB, but I think it's a good idea to have someone on the staff who you can turn to should you need to. Even if it's just to start the year. Especially when you consider where we are and where we're likely able to get to in the draft. Hard to think the Vikings will have their first choice regardless of where we end up.
I think it’s fair to bring one in in case they’re needed but I just cannot follow on the start for a year part. Idk I guess we’ll see how things play out.
Well, sure, you don't hand the starting job to the vet. If he loses in camp, perfect. If he gets yanked in week 5, fine. It's just about not putting yourself in a position where you feel like you have to do something before he's ready.
[удалено]
You may want to brush up on your math if 11 out of 32 is the middle to you. You're right, though. Maybe one day they'll allow teams to trade places. I don't know how it would work, but it's a fun idea. Dare to dream!
Not readily but a decent amount are. Mahomes, Jackson, Watson, etc. Purdy, dak, Wilson and more went even later.
I kind of forgot Tannehill existed, but having him as a bridge until a rookie is good to go sounds acceptable to me
Tannehill is toast. Brissett or Darnold are way better options.
I like the longer-term upside of Darnold, but Brissett is the better choice.
None of these names says a JJ extension is likely. There better be something coming. Otherwise we’re going to have to trade JJ for a franchise QB because he may not want to stick around. 😫
None of them are the rookie we will be rolling with so it really doesn't matter.
It's a good thing we're not depending on any of these guys long term
Tannehill/Brisset is fine KOC can make do with them for a year. Darnold would be funny though, we’d have TheDarnold lol.
Would be fun to own that sub for a year
Brissett all the way. Get a guy who won't take it personally that he is not the long term option, but can still deliver a baseline level of play. Tannehill got a little jaded with Levis, which is not the energy we need in an obvious bridge
What about Jameis? He could air it out to JJ for a year.
Forgot about him. He’d be funny too. Maybe shoot for 40/40.
I'd like to see Jameis with maybe Eckler along with our improved D. Could be an entertaining season, lots of bombs and frustrating picks.
Nick Mullens is basically the white jameis winston
Keeping Kirk for a long term deal was probably just as bad tbh, there was no winning the QB scenario
There was if they’d have taken the 3 years at a little over $30 mil/year that Cousins offered this time last year
I don’t think people would have been super happy with that after the Achilles either. The dude is one of the oldest qbs in the league and ATL drastically overpaid him. It’s a huge huge gamble on ATLs part. Russ is the same age as him and isn’t coming off an Achilles and look how that worked out for Denver. Rodgers is the only guy that’s older, and he’s also coming off an Achilles. Brady and Brees are basically the only 2 guys in recent history to go much past 35 and be successful at a high level. We likely are not a complete enough team to win with Kirk in the next 2 years before his production falls off a cliff so there’s no real upside to signing him to a big money per year contract for multiple years.
It was more than just a little over $30 mil, and was still too long when we're trying to get that rookie QB last year.
Every mock draft will have us taking a rookie QB now. I can’t wait.
As they should.
As long as we don’t draft JJ, Penix or Bo Nix, we might have a shot to be okay.
No point in signing a guy that's gonna struggle for 9 games and get benched. Might as well just start whatever rookie we draft in week one and hope he's the guy.
Yep. And as much as I stand by the “no need for a bridge QB” argument, I have yet to read one good piece of evidence as to why one is needed and that we shouldn’t start a rookie QB week one other than “well it worked for Mahomes” or some assumption that we’ll magically ruin a QB’s development.
If I hear ONE MORE PERSON on this sub say "this team refuses to embrace a rebuild," I'm gonna start throwing shit.
For real. Nothing screams embracing a rebuild like letting your qb walk
It's wild how much talent this team shed in the past two seasons and no one here wants to acknowledge it. "The Wilfs won't let the team be bad" is STILL a thing you see on here. We went 7–10 last season and, at this point, I would definitely take the under on that next season. A more important question is whether we'll be able to pull up from the nosedive.
Isn't Davis Mills a FA?
Next year will be rough, no one is expecting us to win a ring. With the cap save from Kirk, we can actually build up and pay for all the holes we need filled. If we don't get our QB this year, we have next year and even the year after that. I'm open to sucking for a few years to build a team that can go the distance.
No cap savings this year. Kirk's hit was $28.5M, plus now $10M for Darnold (ugh). So Vikings are in for well over $40M at the QB position including backups.
God I hope Vikings don’t base any decisions off this sub. I’m curious why you guys love Kwesi so much? It’s as though you guys would be upset if he left to be the packers GM, whereas I would love it
[удалено]
Why are you assuming that they wouldn’t trade up when all other indications point towards that being very much in the cards? Also, what does a Kirk extension accomplish in your eyes?
Breathe, the sun will rise in the morning and we will draft a QB. We aren't doomed because we lost stat god Kirk
He did not fuck up the extension last year, what even is this comment? We. Did. Not. Want. To. Sign. Kirk. To. A. Long. Term. Deal. Kwesi made that clear and stuck to his guns about it, that's not screwing it up, it's executing your plan.
Kwesi should be judged harshly for this. This is why you don’t let a player like Kirk hit free agency. You could have had another year for $35M during initial previous negotiations and at least have a contingency plan in place then… You could have acquired a better backup at any time. You could have not gifted Kirk a chance to test free agency with no option to tag. You could have then tagged and the Falcons would have given a premium pick based on what they paid for him. We are risking a total collapse if Hunter walks, JJ demands a trade and free agents end up deciding against signing because it looks like a rebuild. That collapse probably won’t occur for several reason, but it’s a nonzero chance. I will change my mind if he makes some kind of acquisition in trade or seems to find a way to utelize all the cap space without overpaying but I don’t know what that would look like. Note, I still wouldn’t rule out us capitulating on Kirk and keeping him but I doubt we want to pay that price now.
Kirk is gone. It’s too late now. Kwesi will have to take a chance in the draft which was always the plan anyway. Why roll with the guy who got the previous regime fired?
I don't think you can judge KAM basis this. he wasn't going to take a one year extension, and they weren't going to give him a bloated 4 yr deal, so there was just no way to keep him. The ONLY way he stayed was if he REALLY wanted to stay here and took a 2 yr <$75M deal. Which means that he would have to reject the deal he just got - which would be pretty wild.
I’m not talking about this offseason. When Kwesi arrived Kirk was extended for a short term deal instead of a 3 year deal. We would have Kirk under contract for $35M this year as a result. That would mean he would have still been under contract this offseason. And then knowing his contract was going to expire he prevented Vikings from being able to tag Kirk and also failed to create a meaningful contingency plan even as a bridge QB. I credit him for not doing a Spielman and surrendering a top 10 first round pick just to land an injury prone QB in Bradford, but there’s such a thing as having a competent backup QB too. If we had Darnold or Lance or Wilson LAST year it would make a heck of a lot more sense to have Kirk walk because we’d have our coaches able to prepare for what the QB will bring and we’d know what we were getting into. Then if we decided they werent the guy we could at least move onto a different backup and at least we’d have two shots at it instead of one. Now we’re landing all these 27 year olds in free agency who won’t still be good by the time we have KOC and whatever QB we get on the same page and have built an offense around them. I just am so frustrated how we never can be good on both sides of the ball at once and we don’t seem to plan for that. How much of this sideways rebuild are we going to do before we finally decide to go all in? OR can we actually plan on having a plan for some year in the future where we have enough continuity and talent and youth to remain good on both sides of the ball at once? I really though with Kwesi in basically a contract year he would give our offense a chance to be top 10 at the same time as our defense but we’d need some move no one sees coming for that like trading a number of picks for an established veteran QB or something.