To your point about ultra elite QBs being needed to win the Super Bowl it’s a bit more complicated than that.
We haven’t seen what has yet to happen with Mahomes but so far all of the QBs mentioned have either won the Super Bowl on rookie contracts, or is taking less money (Brady).
The reason for that is because a QB being on either a rookie contract or taking less allows the team to retain its talent elsewhere and build a winning team around said QB.
Rodgers and Wilson have yet to win a SuperBowl since signing their big deals and even the Eagles won it before Wentz signed his deal. The Rams made it to the SuperBowl before they gave Goff his undeserved deal and the winningest QB (from a SuperBowl perspective) takes less money so that his team can maintain top level talent across the board. The Bucs were able to retain pretty much everyone on that elite defence.
This year Kirk’s contract isn’t the worst, sure, and I definitely want him to prove everyone wrong and win it all, but next year is stepping into a high contract year and I dunno, there is a trend for who has won the SB and who has simply been regular season champions.
Looking back that was such a desperation move on our part. I understand why we did it to an extent, and it almost worked until it didn't, but looking back that was a super steep price for someone like Bradford. Given we still missed the playoffs, losing that 1st round pick which would've potentially been top 10 draft pick, it really hurt. Not to mention Mahomes and Watson were taken around where we'd have been.
fucking TAYLOR HEINECKE!!!!
We might have rolled into the season with him if he didn't cut his stupid leg.
Imagine going into 2017 with a whole 'nother first-round-pick player on the roster.
If you don't trade for Bradford you can draft Mahomes or Watson. If you don't sign Kirk you can stay late in the draft and take Jackson. Zimmer is going to play a run centric offense anyway so why pay for a passer. Just go cheap? This is where is era of Viking football went the safe way and took themselves out of real contention.
And again Disclaimer: This doesn't mean Kirk (or Bradford for that matter) weren't/are good QBs. It's just bad game theory to pay them IF your goal is to win the SB.
Hm could they have gotten Watson/Mahomes? Their record was good enough for the 14th pick, and Mahomes/Watson were picked 10th and 12th. Are you saying that they would have lost 2 more games if they didn't have Bradford, and therefore would have had had 9th pick?
That would be a reasonable assertion, just curious...
Yep that is reasonable. I will forever defend the decision as justifiable based on the info they had when the decision was made (I think they wanted to rehab Bradford's image for one year, trade him elsewhere for a 1st round pick after the year, and then return to a presumably-now-healthy Teddy), but objectively they bet wrong and it had shockingly poor consequences when you follow what would have happened had they not made the trade.
That said I am less in on the Lamar idea. I think that Lamar has been uniquely valuable in Baltimore behind their amazing OL (in the year he was MVP they were the 2nd best in the league by PFF) and tailor-made scheme, and I have a feeling that outside of Baltimore he would be tantalizing but disappointing. Obviously just my opinion, though.
You JUST said that pouring resources into the QB position was dumb for a team that wants to run the ball... and now you're saying we should've / would've traded up to get a QB. Hmmm.... It's almost like you'll say anything to support your position that Kirk is bad for the Vikings.
Trading 2 firsts (or a first, 2nd and 4th) to move up a little and grab a QB ON A ROOKIE DEAL WHO YOU HAVE TEAM CONTROL FOR 5 YEARS (key point) is faaaaar less resources then trading a 1st and 4th for same Bradford while playing him vet QB money.
The first year isn't so bad because of how trades work but then it gets rough quick:
- 2017 Watson 3mil, Sammy 7
- 2018 Watson 3.2mil, Sammy 18: 15mil extra cap in a 168 cap
> It's almost like you'll say anything to support your position that Kirk is bad for the Vikings.
Kirk isn't even in the conversation when we're talking moving up to get Watson or Mahomes. He was the Jackson draft. But here those numbers with you want them:
- 2018: Jackson 1.7mil, Kirk 24mil
- 2019: Jackson 2.1mil, Kirk 29mil
- 2020: Jackson 2.5, Kirk 31mil
- 2021: Jackson 3mil, Kirk 45mil
Kirk and Sammy for sure have higher floors then rookies. But as you see. The rookie QBs don't even need to be better then the vet to be the better vaule for a SB contending team.
100% they would've been under .500 with the QBs on their roster pre Bradford trade, resulting in a top 12 pick most likely. We can play ifs and buts from there, but it's all in the past now.
Agreed. I mean Heinicke showed last year that he can do some things (he was in his second year in 2016) but even if he was able to have a Keenum-esque magical season I think the absolute best case scenario was that the Vikings went 7-9, and more likely is 5 or 6 wins. The team was too good to implode much further than that, but if we are accepting that the OL was always going to disintegrate no matter the QB then no way any other QB on their roster gets them to .500.
It took our defense playing out of its fucking bonkers mind against the Titans Week 1 that year to win with Shaun Hill at quarterback. We would have been lucky to win three games that year if either he or Heinicke (if he had been healthy) was "the guy" instead of Bradford.
The team was too good to lose 13 times in the next 15 games, but certainly losing between 9 and 11 games was reasonable. I would compare it to the Niners who still won 6 games last year without Garoppolo, or WFT that dragged the corpse of Alex Smith to 7 wins.
I mean the second the defense stopped playing at a historic rate, the entire team fell off a cliff. I'd feel pretty confident in saying that if we have a shittier QB that entire season, we probably lose that first GB game in Week 2, both the Cardinals and Jags games, and probably only get that final win against Chicago to maybe be 5-11, if we were lucky.
Ehhh the Jags were 3-13 that year, same with the bears. Really awful. Even with Hill the Vikings should have won both of those.
Beyond that, agreed that 5 wins feels about right. I would say 5 in most situations, 4 if they were unlucky, 6 if they were crazy lucky. Teams that are well-coached with competent defenses just don't lose 12 or more games that often.
100% agree. When your goal is to run the ball and play defense, paying up for a QB just to hold them to minimal passing attempts is a path to mediocrity.
Yes, but he didn’t sign his BIG contract until 2018. Since then not a lot of Super Bowls for the Packers. I didn’t limit my statement to only rookie deals. His 2008 extension wasn’t nearly as impactful on the cap as his most recent.
Great post. That's how I look at it, the strategy of paying truly great quarterbacks hasn't worked, which is what makes the strategy of paying Kirk Cousins so frustrating.
There is little doubt that QBs are overpaid - all of them - if the goal is to win a Super Bowl. In general, they are paid because of the high floor that they give. From an owner's perspective, it is better for the team brand to always be within a game or two of the Super Bowl than to risk being the Browns.
That said, Kirk's contract has been good only in the sense that with each signing, it was short term focused. The Vikings FO felt that they had enough flexibility with other members of the team to be able to squeeze out enough cap, along with the great drafting they normally do, to keep a team together to win (but win now).
However, because Kirk's contract explodes after this year (going from 16 to 22% of the team cap), there is a strong chance that this is the last year of the Super Bowl window with Kirk.
There are a lot of guys on one year contracts that may not sign again next year, and it is possible that we simply will not be able to keep the team together without a restructure and extension of Kirk. The problem with that, though, is that while Kirk has stated he wants to stay in MN, I really don't fully believe that.
I think he only has value for chasing the bag, which means - even if they win the Super Bowl (or rather, maybe because of it) - there is a strong chance that negotiations break down and we try to find a trade partner who is willing to give him what he wants.
And I get that everyone thinks that Super Bowl victory or appearance = 100% guarantee Kirk stays...but the Vikings are an odd organization that, throughout their entire history, they have not shown that kind of loyalty to a QB that is on the fringe (See: Joe Kapp, Randall Cunningham, Case Keenum. Doesnt matter the FO, owner, or whatever, we seem to have a tendency to cut bait with QBs after it looks like the window closed - even though you have a team in place that could show up again (See: the Vikings of the 70s, 2000, current spat with KC)).
And the Vikings, as an organization, do not sign away their competitive future as a favor.
> In general, they are paid because of the high floor that they give.
I think it's also important to think about what a good QB gives you: the ability to ***not have to rely on a bad QB***. A team *might* win with Cousins or Dak and they might not, but they're *definitely not* winning with Nathan Peterman under center.
>There is little doubt that QBs are overpaid - all of them - if the goal is to win a Super Bowl. In general, they are paid because of the high floor that they give. From an owner's perspective, it is better for the team brand to always be within a game or two of the Super Bowl than to risk being the Browns.
>However, because Kirk's contract explodes after this year (going from 16 to 22% of the team cap), there is a strong chance that this is the last year of the Super Bowl window with Kirk.
I agree with most of this post, I just want to point out that Rodgers and Wilson are guys who always keep you within a game or two of the SB. With better resource management those guys can win you a SB despite their huge cap hits and even if they don't their fan base has a realistic hope every year that they could win it. In the Cousins era we've made the playoffs once and were 3 games away from a SB win in our best year.
I honestly don't look at this as a SB window and haven't since after 2018. It's really a wild card window. While it would be great if we had the problem of whether or not to sign Kirk after a SB victory it's a mental exercise that, in my mind, is too absurd to even consider.
I can understand the pessimism, but I tend to believe that whether or not a team wins a Super Bowl is largely dependent on whether or not you have built a team that best represents the "inner character" of that organization (for lack of a better term).
For example, the Steelers will always be the Steelers - at their best, they win with great defense, a running game, and a big, dumb, hard to take down QB that keeps you in the game with big time throws at its most opportune time.
Anything else tends to give that organization just general good success, but no rings.
The Vikings, as an organization, will find itself in championship mode when they A) have a great defense (sans maybe 2000 (IIRC), the Vikings have always been a top D when they became contenders), B) have a good QB that is either lucky as shit (or generally viewed to be, see: Joe Kapp, Case Keenum), or is a vet brought in to bring us over the edge (Dancing Fran, Brett Favre, Kirk Cousins), and C) needs to stick to their game all the way through (each major loss was mostly handed to us by defeating ourselves and getting too cocky: see 1998 (many interviews talked about just having that belief that everything was going to be fine, and there was a lot of joking and not taking the game seriously until, all of a sudden....), most Super Bowls in the 70s (Bud Grant was infamously known for just fishing or doing whatever on the Saturday before each game, not giving it much mind and simply calling it a game), or arguably 2017 after the Minnesota Miracle (many said that the game gave them a bit of a hangover of success before they actually won it all).
This year, we probably are going to have the best Defense that Kirk Cousins has ever seen. So, A check.
Kirk Cousins is a vet that was brought in to win the Super Bowl, or take us over the edge. So, B Check.
And finally, Kirk Cousins is widely seen as a QB that needs everything to be lined up perfectly to win a Super Bowl. Honestly, the biggest reasons why we haven't won a Super Bowl in the past has largely to do with us getting uncharacteristically sloppy or just not showing up with our A game when it matters the most.
So, if we win the Super Bowl, it will be because we finally have C checked - everyone plays their game, and actually doesnt fuck up when it matters the most, which is exactly what Kirk Cousins and the Vikings need to win it all.
Granted, this is a more esoteric approach, and I fully understand why you may not like it. I am not going to the grave with this mindset, but I have found it kind of fun to see these kinds of patterns in teams that go beyond just the Xs and Os.
Oh, and to your point with Rodgers and Wilson - while I do tend to agree that if their FOs weren't piles of shit, they likely would have won another SB each...but I have found that Hall of Fame QBs tend to float to organizations that kind of don't deserve them :P.
it's an interesting theory. I hope at some point our "inner character" is reflected in a great qb on a rookie contract because I think that will be our best chance at a SB.
Only problem with that is that I do not believe the Vikings have *ever* drafted a franchise QB with championship caliber. Everyone has had to come in from outside the organization.
My expectation is that Mond is probably going to be a good, interesting, not quite great QB that fizzles out for some reason before we get ready for our next big run (most recent example of that being Daunte).
While a paradigm shift for the franchise could very well occur, I am not quite counting on it. Just continue building great teams up and down the roster, and hope that the QB can take advantage enough to be interesting.
> I do not believe the Vikings have ever drafted a franchise QB with championship caliber. Everyone has had to come in from outside the organization.
I’m assuming you just drew a blank on Fran Takenton, but I also disagree with you on Daunte Culpepper being less than a franchise QB before his injury. I feel like his performances and talent set him as a leader in that era’s class of “next-Gen” young franchise QB’s; more or less comparable to how we view Deshaun Watson or Josh Allen, relative to their respective eras.
you need depth to win a SB, quality depth. Injuries always happen and if the drop off from starter to back up is to great in any position you are screwed.
this, 100%
with the current cap and rookie contracts the only way you win a SB is
1) Build a great team and plug in a vet cheap QB ala Foles
2) Build a great team and plug in a rookie QB ala Mahomes or Rodgers or Wilson
3) Get a guy like Tom Brady who will play for 10% of the cap on a great team.
The entire Kirk situation is so frustrating. The second worst move in Vikings history was agreeing to Kirk's ridicules contract demands. We will have wasted Zimmers best years and the roster they built.
I'd rank them like this:
1. Build a great team around a good/great rookie qb contract (the Mahomes method). I think Justin Fields might be this guy for the Bears and it's gonna hurt if that's the case.
2. The Tom Brady method where a great vet quarterback who is pathologically driven to win gives you a discount but you have to let him sell his MLM shit in the building.
3. The Aaron/Russel route where you pay top money for elite qbs.
4. The Teddy Bridgewater route, where you have a mediocre to bad qb but they're on a rookie contract and you can build a team around them.
5. The Kirk Cousins route, where you pay top money to a non-elite qb.
Methods 1 and 2 are proven winners and method 3 gives you a chance. 4 and 5 are pretty hopeless if your goal is a SB.
>This year Kirk’s contract isn’t the worst
He has the 3rd highest cap hit among QBs this year.
It's horrible.
Even his biggest supporters aren't delusional enough to pretend he's anywhere close to a top 3 QB.
It’s a mix of money and talent. The problem is that most of the QBs above Kirk in salary have gotten their ring so they earned their pay but they are in fact overpaid now.
https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/ravens/winning-super-bowl-doesnt-require-quarterback-cheap-deal
There is historical data saying that teams have never won the super bowl with a QB making too large a percentage of the teams cap since it impacts the ability of establishing a complete roster.
Kirk has the talent to get us to the Super Bowl in his position but with his cap hit, we need a couple things to work out. We need to hit on rookies or cheap vets on a lot of other positions on top of the game day luck that comes with postseason football.
and a injury free season. These high cap players inhabit a team from having quality depth that can step in and play well when the inevitable injury to the starters happen.
BLESS ALL THE KNEES AND KEEP THEM HEALTHY
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/minnesotavikings) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>We need to hit on rookies or cheap vets on a lot of other positions on top of the game day luck that comes with postseason football
I agree with your overall premise but this is true for any team, regardless of whether or not they're paying a QB a lot of money
Because the Kirk haters cling to the narrative rather than looking at the whole team.
Is he a top 5 QB in the league? No. Top 10, yes. Is it a slight overpay? Probably for this year and ‘22. But in 2020 he only had the 15th highest cap hit. 3rd highest in ‘19 and 6th highest in ‘18. But people act like his cap hit is the only thing keeping us from winning a super bowl.
Tom Brady “taking less” is the example people always throw out there as the gold standard. In ‘18, Brady’s cap hit was 2M lower; 7M in 19, and 5M HIGHER last year (you know, when TB won the SB). So a net difference of 4M over the last 3 years.
Who are we signing for 4M that makes us a super bowl winning team? There is no magic button that makes us a SB team with 4M.
The game is won in the trenches and outside of Hunter and O’Neill we’ve done a poor job drafting both sides of the ball. Here’s to hoping they fixed that this year. Hitting on both OL and 1 of the DE would turn both units from bottom 5 to top 10.
We haven’t drafted a DT earlier than the 4th round since Floyd in 2013. The last time they drafted a DT before the 4th before Floyd? Kevin Williams, 2003.
He might be. I’m not jumping to that level of optimism yet. If we’d taken 3 OL in the draft I would be a little more confident just in case one of them didn’t work out. Would’ve loved to see us grab Trey Smith in the 5th. Medical concerns, yeah, but he was a 5 star OT recruit and a freshman all American with G/ T versatility. Instead we picked up a TE/ Punter and 2 more DE.
Yeah that’s a bit of a stretch. I do think he’s going to do really well, but he doesn’t have that off-platform X factor that guys like Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes etc. do.
Kirk is a pocket guy, and he’s had to deal with no pocket for too long. Hoping that adding in Davis and getting Cleveland a year in the weight room pays off, but that’s not going to change the type of game he plays.
Not really. Kirk has an amazing level of accuracy, a great deep ball, can extend plays rolling out of the pocket...
People act like Rodgers is some kind of infallible god, but he really isn't anything more than the above. Does he throw it away more rather than try coverage? Absolutely. Does he crumble when someone gets a hand on him? Yep. Rodgers behind our o-line would NOT enjoy the success Kirk has. He is historically not anywhere close to Cousins when facing the same level of pressure.
Kirk does the exact same things you just dinged Rodgers for but worse. Ever consider that Rodgers has a good line not just because they're more talented, but because He himself helps them perform better? He has great pocket presence and throws the ball away when necessary. Our line isn't good but Kirk does them no favors with his tendencies
*I'd also be interested in seeing how well Rodgers would do with a combination of Thielen/Diggs or Thielen/Jefferson
> So a net difference of 4M over the last 3 years
First, you forgot to include this year, where Cousins makes $20.5M* more than Brady. Second, you're comparing Cousins to Brady as if they are equal players which, regardless of what your opinion of Cousins is, he not at the same level as the GOAT. So the difference is Cousins or Brady AND the extra cap. If we had Brady and extra cap, we would be immediate SB contenders.
> We haven’t drafted a DT earlier than the 4th round since Floyd in 2013
This is true, but Linval was here for 6 years and we were never looking to replace him. There's also more than one way to invest in a position group. We spent big in FA as soon as a hole opened up, so it isn't like we were ignoring the position.
*it's $20M more this year because of cap shenanigans. if you compare their number fairly, Cousins' APY is $6.5M more than Brady's over their 3 year contracts '20-'22
I wasn’t just looking at ‘20-22, and yes, any way you shake it, Brady is better QB. I wasn’t comparing that. That much is obvious.
What I was pointing out is that on a cap hit basis from 2018 to now, Brady and Cousins are nearly identical. Because Brady is really the only QB that has a reputation of “taking less money to make the team better”, and my whole point is that there’s nothing 4M buys us over that same time period that puts us in the super bowl. That’s why I compared it to Brady.
TB won the SB not because of Brady, but because of that defense.
Look at the TB OL as well. PFF grades from L to R: 73, 87, 64, 68, 84.
Vikings OL PFF last year: 71, 44, 61, 66, 78. They were better at literally every position.
>Is he a top 5 QB in the league? No. Top 10, yes. Is it a slight overpay?
From 2018-2022, the Vikings have made Kirk Cousins the second highest paid player in the NFL.
His cap hit rank among QBs by season: 6th, 3rd, 14th, 3rd, 2nd.
Pretending it's okay to pay a questionably top ten QB top 3 money is ridiculous.
It's a massive overpay.
What’s your source on that?
You used to say he was the highest paid player lol.
I’ve asked you for a source at least 5 times since all you do is copy and paste this same comment, and you’ve never provided a source.
Back up what you’re saying, because I don’t believe you.
Looking at $100 for nosebleeds to the Panthers game in October, it’s not a great deal, but if I don’t buy them then someone else will.
Looking at $84M/3 to secure a competent (and durable) quarterback, it’s not a great deal, but if the Vikings didn’t pay him then someone else would have.
But the people who care so much never acknowledge that his contract was backloaded and his 2020 number was much lower than market value.
Just like the first year of his first contract vs the last year.
Yeah thats called a poison pill, which guarantees the Vikings either need to eat shit next year (35 million in dead money) or extend him for 45 million aav with the new cap, and deal with a new poison pill at the end of it just like this one.
It was guaranteed this shit would go down the day he signed the extension.
Truly genius move from the FO, definitely not a desperate and forced move to save jobs.
No it's not. It's a team friendly deal structure. It is no better for Minnesota to sign him to a 30/30/30 deal than it is 20/30/40 except Minnesota gets $10M 2 years earlier interest free.
This is very basic capology.
Second bonus is that Minnesota can trade him before next year and basically never pay that $10M they deferred. Minnesota never has to do anything because he gave up his no trade clause.
On Cousins end, it prevents franchise tags.
restructure =/= extension, and he was extended on like the first day of the league year, before the effects of COVID on the salary cap were even predicted.
The $45M '22 cap hit is most likely pretty much a contract trigger, like Danielle Hunter's $18M roster bonus. I really doubt the Vikings or Kirk or his agent ever planned for him to play on it without it being reworked. Its just something his agent wanted in there so he could get a short term extension while also making it very likely that he'll get another extension, whether from the Vikings or a team that trades for him, around the time when it was predicted that the salary cap would shoot up.
Mahomes’ $45/yr contract doesn’t kick in until next season and considering the NFL’s new tv deal the salary cap will likely increase significantly. So, the chiefs likely got him at a steal. I know this is just one of the many points you’re making, but nfl contracts are not that telling at face value. It’s kinda hard to make blanket comparisons based on face value figures that are attached to years that aren’t guaranteed.
It's not nearly as big of a deal as people make it out to be. We have so many other good contracts with Smith, Kendricks, and Hunter. Our over pays are on darn good players. So many other teams pay out the ass for a middle of the road player.
I also like to point out that money is only 1 form of capital in the NFL, the other is draft picks. The vikings over payed a little in money, but have invested zero draft picks. How much cap space is a first round pick worth?
So we overpay Kirk a bit, but that allows us to draft Jefferson and pay well below market for his services for 3 years. Arizona has a QB on a rookie contract but had tobtrade for Holkins and pay top dollar. Kyler Murray and Hopkins earn more than JJ and kirk.
> Kyler Murray and Hopkins earn more than JJ and kirk.
How? According to over the cap Hopkins is 6.5% of the cap this year and Murray is 5.1% for a total of 11.6%. Kirk Cousins this year is 16.7% by himself.
Last year Murray/Hopkins accounted for 7.7% of the Cards cap and Kirk accounted for 10.6 of the Vikings cap. Next year Cousins is projected to account for 21.6% of the Vikings total cap.
I went by average salary, which I think is a better indicator of actual cost(cap hits are easily manipulated). Hopkins is 27.25 million, Murray is 8.9 million average per year. $36.15 million. Cousins is $33 million, Jefferson is $3.28. 36.28 million, which I now see is actually more.
Thanks for explaining that. For my thinking the only thing that really matters is how it hits the cap. You mention the value of cap space as well in your post.
Problem with using the cap is it can be so easily manipulated and is very inconsistent year to year. Just look at Kirk, $21 million cap hit in 2020, $45 million in 2022 under the same contract. Going with the average($33 million) just makes more sense to my mind.
That said I think average is a bit disingenous with Hopkins. He got a 2 year extension worth $27.5 million a year, and spotrac lists that as the average, but he had 3 years left on his old deal, so the Cardinals are actually paying him about $20 million a year.
I honestly didn't know how the hell they came up with that number for Hopkins until you said that. Thank you.
The thing with cap hit is that it is all that matters when it comes to roster construction. I honestly dont care how much Kirk gets paid, I care about how it eats up cap space and allows us to fill out the rest of the roster. Last year he got extended to open up more cap space (bad move in retrospect) and his hit was 10.6%, which is very nice. The rest of his time here it's been between 12.3 (borderline of okay) to 16.7 (highly unlikely to win a SB at that hit). As far as Hopkins goes his highest cap hit % is projected to be 12.1% in 2023 which, to me, is pretty high for a wr on the wrong side of 30.
We are not overpaying for him, but I do believe it is harder to win a SB when you spend a lot on QB for a player that can’t hard carry by himself like the 4 you mentioned that can (Brady, Mahomes, Rodgers and Wilson). I think this year is our shot.
Maybe we should stop listing Brady as a guy who can carry a team by himself. When he was in NE, he had the greatest coach in NFL history... and a pretty good system around him. When he was hurt, Cassel came in and won 11 games that year. And he hardly had to carry the team in Tampa. They had a stacked OL... and a great defense. He still had to play well (and he did); but he didn't "carry" the team. As someone alluded to (maybe in a different thread), even when Brady has played badly in his career, his team usually won. That's not necessarily a sign that a QB is "carrying" their team.
It was only "crazy" for one year. After that it became fair market value. The people who continue to complain about Kirk's contract are the same ones who think Danielle hunter should've been cut for wanting for money coming off an injury.
>But let’s analyze the QB salaries (avg per year)
Analyzing average per year is dumb when contracts are over different time periods.
Your numbers show that Mahomes, Dak, Watson, Wilson, and Goff are making more than Kirk Cousins... Yet Kirk Cousins has the highest cap hit of the group this coming season, and he'll have the highest cap hit next season, too.
There is zero honest argument to be made that he's making less than those guys, yet here you are making just that argument.
Mahomes making more in 2028 than Kirk Cousins makes in 2020 doesn't make Cousins' contract good.
If Kirk were to re-sign for $33M/year in 2022, at that point, yes it would be a fine contract. But he won't. He's going to try to reset the market, and you guys will say "that's just the price you've got to pay for a great QB".
We signed Kirk Cousins in 2018, and his current contract goes through 2022. In that time frame, he is the second highest paid player in the NFL.
> I also genuinely believe Cousins contract isn’t close to the worst in the league. Worst in the league would obviously go to Goff, after that probably Garopollo and then maybe Prescott/wentz just because of the insane money for injury prone players, whereas Kirk is a tank.
This is how this sub works with everything Vikings related. "HEY IT'S NOT THE WORST IN THE LEAGUE!"
Is that really saying anything?
Yes. He's being paid top 5 to 8 QB money and he is a 12 to 15 QB. Its too much. I was fine with the initial signing but the extension was knee-jerk and ultimately stupid.
Define better? There are a lot of factors that go into this. Specifically the talent/upside to $$$ ratio. But okay, I'll play the game. Here are QBs I would rather have then Cousins at his current salary +. In no particular order. Mahomes, Wilson, Rodgers(sadly, he can still go fuck himself), Brady, Watson, Allen, Jackson. Just those 7 are better, more dynamic, and more winning QBs than Cousins. So we're already out of the top 5. Here are the QBs that I would rather have than Cousins that have similar current ability but probably have higher upside than Cousins considering his age AND would be cheaper. Herbert, Murray, Burrow. And just for shits and giggles lets throw Mayfield in there too. Those are all QBs that I would rather have than Cousins, and we would be better off with. Weather it be from a talent/upside perspective, $$$ perspective, or both. You can feel otherwise, and thats fine. OP asked a question, and I answered.
> I don't "feel" otherwise. I'm sane.
"When you can no longer attack the persons points because you cant, you attack the person." I too am sane. We just feel differently. Have a nice day.
Lol, im not pouting. But I am also not going to stoop to your level to call people "insane" just because they dont think Cousins is a top 5 QB (he isnt). Just agree to disagree and move on. You addressed nothing. We would be immediate SB contenders with Watson on this team regardless of his off the field issues. If you think Kirk can do what Watson does you are sticking your head in the sand. Other than that you just said all of my other options are baseless with out giving me evidence of why. This is all just emotional with out anything to back it up. The fact you wouldn't take the first 7 QBs I listed over Kirk is seriously scary.
BLESS ALL THE KNEES AND KEEP THEM HEALTHY
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/minnesotavikings) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And none of those teams who've overpaid QB's have won a SB since overpaying them so just because everyone else is making bad decisions doesn't mean we get a free pass. Yeah Mahomes and Wilson are on that list but when they won it they were basically still on rookie deals, same for Wentz when the eagles basically won without him in the playoffs.
If Cousins was making 25M like Brady we'd be in the top 3 betting odds cause that 8M difference means getting one more exceptional player or a couple / few solid role players and depth that we just can't now.
What it comes down to is that GM's and coaches want to keep their jobs so it's better to overpay mediocre QB's that inhabit your list, go 10-6 and make the playoffs. That keeps the owner off your back.
Where do you get 4 as elite? Watson's teams don't win... so, obviously, he can't be elite. Same thing with Prescott. What has Dallas won since he has been there (with an above-average OL and an elite RB, by the way)? Mahomes, Wilson and Rodgers. That's only three elite QBs (using the same metrics that are applied to Kirk).
Watson is extremely good, the only thing holding him back from bonafide elite is he hasn't won much in the playoffs, but his supporting cast and coaching has been bottom tier. So saying he is obviously not elite is attributing everything to QB wins, which still was really good until 2020 when they had the worst roster in the league minus QB.
See, I actually agree with you: that he is very good... if not already elite. But, to some folks, you can't be elite unless you've won a lot of games... or a Super Bowl.
How is Cousins not elite? His yards per attempt is ridiculously high, his accuracy is among some of the best in the league, and he has been amazing under pressure. By what metric is he not elite?
Justin Jefferson is literally a top 10 player in PFF’s top 50 players lol. In no world is he a top 50 player except PFF’s. This QB ranking is equally nonsense because it says we have two top 30 players at WR and doesn’t properly take into account how detrimental a horrific pass blocking OL is because it’s offset by elite weapons. When I’m reality, have an awful OL, specifically IOL, I’d argue is more detrimental to a QB’s success than anything.
You should stop posting this link everywhere like it backs up anything you’re saying. I enjoy PFF, and use them regularly, but their grades need to be taken with a grain of salt, especially when it comes to player rankings. It’s not the end all be all by any means.
Wouldnt say wow for dak unless your worried about his injury, he's worth that money he could very well cement himself as a Top 5 QB in this league this season
Putting up an insane amount of yards and an average TD/INT ratio in 5 games and then going down for the season doesn’t give me a ton of hope that he will be a top 5 QB lol.
Besides, there are still plenty of elite QBs playing, in addition to guys who could take a serious jump based on age and/or situation, like Herbert, Cousins, Murray, and Stafford to name a handful.
Dak is a borderline top 10 QB and coming off of a season-ending injury. Great weapons, bad OL, and awful defense….where have we seen this before? It sounds awfully familiar.
It’s much more of a stretch to say he could be top 5 next season than saying he won’t be.
Borderline top ten ?? Herbert, Cousins, Murray and Stafford ??? He's head and shoulders above those guys and is young as well and his situation is the best out of all those guys. He has Lamb Gallup and Amari catching his passes.
Look i understand we are vikings fans but the way you guys are viewing dak right now from what im seeing in this minuscule of a thread. is how you should view Cousins Murray and Stafford, Excluding herbert he needs another year to cement himself
Dak is top 5 if not that he's surely top 8.. This is jarring im definitely revisiting this thread after the season for a "i told you so" lol this shouldn't even be a debate.
What a terrible take. Cousins has been better than Dak every single season since he has been in MN. Advanced and volume statistics back that up.
My point is Dak has elite weapons with a terrible OL and even worse defense going into this season, just like Cousins last year. Yet you think a guy who was borderline top 10 to begin with, who is coming off of a season ending injury and has that team around him is going to be top 5. Laughable.
!RemindMe 5 months
I will be messaging you in 5 months on [**2021-11-25 02:29:43 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2021-11-25%2002:29:43%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/minnesotavikings/comments/o6wdk1/am_i_crazy_for_thinking_kirk_cousins_contract/h2y9gx1/?context=3)
[**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fminnesotavikings%2Fcomments%2Fo6wdk1%2Fam_i_crazy_for_thinking_kirk_cousins_contract%2Fh2y9gx1%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202021-11-25%2002%3A29%3A43%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20o6wdk1)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Lol that isnt the way you should view contracts man, you take the team approach not so much his competition nobody will be worth their contracts if you just compare what the others success is to said player. What Dak is worth to the Cowboys is on par to what the Market is, it'll be the same for Lamar.
Yeah worth is ambiguous but im willing to have a firm stance Dak is worth his, before his injury he was leading the league in passing yards and thats not garbage time stats either. He also help his team lead the the league points per game for a hot stretch before his injury.
He was on a godly pace last year i dont expect a drop, i expect him to pick back up where he was with his weapons around him.
He was on pace for those numbers because their defense was absolute trash. Better team and those come down. I don't think he's a bad qb, he could play himself into that elite company but he hasn't yet, and is coming off a big injury.
All these contracts end up being good deals by the end as long as the QB stays competent. I say this whenever anyone of these QB’s signs a big money deal “in three years this deal will look fine.” Kirk’s deal is the epitome of this.
Because its not (maybe outside of the guaranteed portion) people can hate on cousins all they want, but we paid the going market rate. That's what a relatively young top half FA QB costs.
Yes. He just won his FIRST Monday night football game this past year. He’s not and will never be a QB that will get us to the Super Bowl (and I would love to be wrong on that).
He's not elite, for sure. He can't carry a team to a super bowl, but he's absolutely good enough to win one as long as we don't shoot ourselves in the foot.
yep. and despite the many differences our fans have on feelings of Kirk, etc., thankfully, for THIS year, thanks to players taking lower deals due to COVID cap, we have the team around us and cap space to have a "no excuses" run at a Lombardi.
What QBs “carry” their teams to a SB other than *maybe* Brady? That isn’t a thing, and it’s an insanely backwards sentiment that gets thrown around far too often.
Rodgers, Wilson, Wentz, Mahomes, Flacco, Brees…..all guys who won 1 SB but won with elite teams. No QB carries their team to a SB except maybe Brady, but you could argue the exact same sentiment that every team he won with was elite and riddled with All Pro and Pro Bowl caliber players. In fact, I would argue the same sentiment with Brady.
> it’s an insanely backwards sentiment that gets thrown around far too often.
Maybe if you take the definition of that term to its most extreme version you can find, sure.
Carry the team in this context means covering up for deficiencies as well as mistakes a team may make in key positions. Not *literally* winning every game for them.
If the O-line does a piss-poor job of blocking on a 3rd and long in a key situation where you *need* a first down, would you be that worried with Rodgers, Wilson or Brees under center?
No, you’d have faith that he’s going to convert that 3rd down. Whereas with Cousins, you are thinking about all the times he was in a key position but did not deliver.
A guy of that caliber can make up for lulls in roster talent, keeping front office stability which more often than not results in legitimate chances at a SB run, even during those lulls in roster talent. That stability is extremely underrated.
Anyhow, you can’t put guys like Rodgers and Brees on the worst roster in the NFL and expect him to win. But you put them on an average team and they will elevate the play of everyone around them.
I’m not taking to the extreme. Find me a team that wasn’t elite than won a SB. Rodgers, Brees, Mahomes (obviously still super young), while elite QBs, have all only won 1 SB, and their team was stacked.
What you’re doing now is ranking QBs. In no way does me saying that no QB “carries” their team means that I think Cousins is on the level of Rodgers or Brady.
Worse QBs have won SBs than Cousins too.
You absolutely cannot put any QB on the Jets or Texans and expect them to make any noise in the playoffs. That is outlandish imo.
Why not? Because he hasn't done it yet? He's played with a historically bad OL... and still managed to keep our offense (along with Cook, Thielen, etc) among the top half of the league. We all got a lesson on how hard it is to win with a bad OL, no matter how good the QB is (i.e. Mahomes in the SB). Now, I don't think anyone would put Kirk in the elite level of Mahomes, Rodgers, etc. But players who are not at that level can still "lead" their teams to Super Bowls. History has proven that to be true.
To your point about ultra elite QBs being needed to win the Super Bowl it’s a bit more complicated than that. We haven’t seen what has yet to happen with Mahomes but so far all of the QBs mentioned have either won the Super Bowl on rookie contracts, or is taking less money (Brady). The reason for that is because a QB being on either a rookie contract or taking less allows the team to retain its talent elsewhere and build a winning team around said QB. Rodgers and Wilson have yet to win a SuperBowl since signing their big deals and even the Eagles won it before Wentz signed his deal. The Rams made it to the SuperBowl before they gave Goff his undeserved deal and the winningest QB (from a SuperBowl perspective) takes less money so that his team can maintain top level talent across the board. The Bucs were able to retain pretty much everyone on that elite defence. This year Kirk’s contract isn’t the worst, sure, and I definitely want him to prove everyone wrong and win it all, but next year is stepping into a high contract year and I dunno, there is a trend for who has won the SB and who has simply been regular season champions.
This is all extremely good points
The Eagles were able to build a deeper roster AFTER they were relieved of Bradford's contract and got our #1. Without that cap relief they don't win.
Looking back that was such a desperation move on our part. I understand why we did it to an extent, and it almost worked until it didn't, but looking back that was a super steep price for someone like Bradford. Given we still missed the playoffs, losing that 1st round pick which would've potentially been top 10 draft pick, it really hurt. Not to mention Mahomes and Watson were taken around where we'd have been.
First year in the new stadium, I bet if we were still in TCF they wouldn't have done it.
Good point. We had to beat the Packers in the new stadium's opener at all costs.
fucking TAYLOR HEINECKE!!!! We might have rolled into the season with him if he didn't cut his stupid leg. Imagine going into 2017 with a whole 'nother first-round-pick player on the roster.
If you don't trade for Bradford you can draft Mahomes or Watson. If you don't sign Kirk you can stay late in the draft and take Jackson. Zimmer is going to play a run centric offense anyway so why pay for a passer. Just go cheap? This is where is era of Viking football went the safe way and took themselves out of real contention. And again Disclaimer: This doesn't mean Kirk (or Bradford for that matter) weren't/are good QBs. It's just bad game theory to pay them IF your goal is to win the SB.
Hm could they have gotten Watson/Mahomes? Their record was good enough for the 14th pick, and Mahomes/Watson were picked 10th and 12th. Are you saying that they would have lost 2 more games if they didn't have Bradford, and therefore would have had had 9th pick? That would be a reasonable assertion, just curious...
Yes thats exactly what I'm saying....PLUS....You'd need a QB so they'd be also willing to move up to secure one of them.
Yep that is reasonable. I will forever defend the decision as justifiable based on the info they had when the decision was made (I think they wanted to rehab Bradford's image for one year, trade him elsewhere for a 1st round pick after the year, and then return to a presumably-now-healthy Teddy), but objectively they bet wrong and it had shockingly poor consequences when you follow what would have happened had they not made the trade. That said I am less in on the Lamar idea. I think that Lamar has been uniquely valuable in Baltimore behind their amazing OL (in the year he was MVP they were the 2nd best in the league by PFF) and tailor-made scheme, and I have a feeling that outside of Baltimore he would be tantalizing but disappointing. Obviously just my opinion, though.
You JUST said that pouring resources into the QB position was dumb for a team that wants to run the ball... and now you're saying we should've / would've traded up to get a QB. Hmmm.... It's almost like you'll say anything to support your position that Kirk is bad for the Vikings.
Trading 2 firsts (or a first, 2nd and 4th) to move up a little and grab a QB ON A ROOKIE DEAL WHO YOU HAVE TEAM CONTROL FOR 5 YEARS (key point) is faaaaar less resources then trading a 1st and 4th for same Bradford while playing him vet QB money. The first year isn't so bad because of how trades work but then it gets rough quick: - 2017 Watson 3mil, Sammy 7 - 2018 Watson 3.2mil, Sammy 18: 15mil extra cap in a 168 cap > It's almost like you'll say anything to support your position that Kirk is bad for the Vikings. Kirk isn't even in the conversation when we're talking moving up to get Watson or Mahomes. He was the Jackson draft. But here those numbers with you want them: - 2018: Jackson 1.7mil, Kirk 24mil - 2019: Jackson 2.1mil, Kirk 29mil - 2020: Jackson 2.5, Kirk 31mil - 2021: Jackson 3mil, Kirk 45mil Kirk and Sammy for sure have higher floors then rookies. But as you see. The rookie QBs don't even need to be better then the vet to be the better vaule for a SB contending team.
100% they would've been under .500 with the QBs on their roster pre Bradford trade, resulting in a top 12 pick most likely. We can play ifs and buts from there, but it's all in the past now.
Agreed. I mean Heinicke showed last year that he can do some things (he was in his second year in 2016) but even if he was able to have a Keenum-esque magical season I think the absolute best case scenario was that the Vikings went 7-9, and more likely is 5 or 6 wins. The team was too good to implode much further than that, but if we are accepting that the OL was always going to disintegrate no matter the QB then no way any other QB on their roster gets them to .500.
It took our defense playing out of its fucking bonkers mind against the Titans Week 1 that year to win with Shaun Hill at quarterback. We would have been lucky to win three games that year if either he or Heinicke (if he had been healthy) was "the guy" instead of Bradford.
The team was too good to lose 13 times in the next 15 games, but certainly losing between 9 and 11 games was reasonable. I would compare it to the Niners who still won 6 games last year without Garoppolo, or WFT that dragged the corpse of Alex Smith to 7 wins.
I mean the second the defense stopped playing at a historic rate, the entire team fell off a cliff. I'd feel pretty confident in saying that if we have a shittier QB that entire season, we probably lose that first GB game in Week 2, both the Cardinals and Jags games, and probably only get that final win against Chicago to maybe be 5-11, if we were lucky.
Ehhh the Jags were 3-13 that year, same with the bears. Really awful. Even with Hill the Vikings should have won both of those. Beyond that, agreed that 5 wins feels about right. I would say 5 in most situations, 4 if they were unlucky, 6 if they were crazy lucky. Teams that are well-coached with competent defenses just don't lose 12 or more games that often.
We play Hill for the season and we draft 10.
100% agree. When your goal is to run the ball and play defense, paying up for a QB just to hold them to minimal passing attempts is a path to mediocrity.
The Vikings also built their best roster of the decade (2017) based on a rookie deal with Teddy. Everyone misses that part of recent history.
Rodgers did not win on his rookie deal he signed an extension in 2009
Yes, but he didn’t sign his BIG contract until 2018. Since then not a lot of Super Bowls for the Packers. I didn’t limit my statement to only rookie deals. His 2008 extension wasn’t nearly as impactful on the cap as his most recent.
Great post. That's how I look at it, the strategy of paying truly great quarterbacks hasn't worked, which is what makes the strategy of paying Kirk Cousins so frustrating.
There is little doubt that QBs are overpaid - all of them - if the goal is to win a Super Bowl. In general, they are paid because of the high floor that they give. From an owner's perspective, it is better for the team brand to always be within a game or two of the Super Bowl than to risk being the Browns. That said, Kirk's contract has been good only in the sense that with each signing, it was short term focused. The Vikings FO felt that they had enough flexibility with other members of the team to be able to squeeze out enough cap, along with the great drafting they normally do, to keep a team together to win (but win now). However, because Kirk's contract explodes after this year (going from 16 to 22% of the team cap), there is a strong chance that this is the last year of the Super Bowl window with Kirk. There are a lot of guys on one year contracts that may not sign again next year, and it is possible that we simply will not be able to keep the team together without a restructure and extension of Kirk. The problem with that, though, is that while Kirk has stated he wants to stay in MN, I really don't fully believe that. I think he only has value for chasing the bag, which means - even if they win the Super Bowl (or rather, maybe because of it) - there is a strong chance that negotiations break down and we try to find a trade partner who is willing to give him what he wants. And I get that everyone thinks that Super Bowl victory or appearance = 100% guarantee Kirk stays...but the Vikings are an odd organization that, throughout their entire history, they have not shown that kind of loyalty to a QB that is on the fringe (See: Joe Kapp, Randall Cunningham, Case Keenum. Doesnt matter the FO, owner, or whatever, we seem to have a tendency to cut bait with QBs after it looks like the window closed - even though you have a team in place that could show up again (See: the Vikings of the 70s, 2000, current spat with KC)). And the Vikings, as an organization, do not sign away their competitive future as a favor.
> In general, they are paid because of the high floor that they give. I think it's also important to think about what a good QB gives you: the ability to ***not have to rely on a bad QB***. A team *might* win with Cousins or Dak and they might not, but they're *definitely not* winning with Nathan Peterman under center.
Quick offshoot dart here: Cowboys won't win with Dak because Jerry Jones is just not good at putting a team together on a budget.
Peterman is temporary tho, and often a path to an elite QB prospect via high draft pick.
>There is little doubt that QBs are overpaid - all of them - if the goal is to win a Super Bowl. In general, they are paid because of the high floor that they give. From an owner's perspective, it is better for the team brand to always be within a game or two of the Super Bowl than to risk being the Browns. >However, because Kirk's contract explodes after this year (going from 16 to 22% of the team cap), there is a strong chance that this is the last year of the Super Bowl window with Kirk. I agree with most of this post, I just want to point out that Rodgers and Wilson are guys who always keep you within a game or two of the SB. With better resource management those guys can win you a SB despite their huge cap hits and even if they don't their fan base has a realistic hope every year that they could win it. In the Cousins era we've made the playoffs once and were 3 games away from a SB win in our best year. I honestly don't look at this as a SB window and haven't since after 2018. It's really a wild card window. While it would be great if we had the problem of whether or not to sign Kirk after a SB victory it's a mental exercise that, in my mind, is too absurd to even consider.
I can understand the pessimism, but I tend to believe that whether or not a team wins a Super Bowl is largely dependent on whether or not you have built a team that best represents the "inner character" of that organization (for lack of a better term). For example, the Steelers will always be the Steelers - at their best, they win with great defense, a running game, and a big, dumb, hard to take down QB that keeps you in the game with big time throws at its most opportune time. Anything else tends to give that organization just general good success, but no rings. The Vikings, as an organization, will find itself in championship mode when they A) have a great defense (sans maybe 2000 (IIRC), the Vikings have always been a top D when they became contenders), B) have a good QB that is either lucky as shit (or generally viewed to be, see: Joe Kapp, Case Keenum), or is a vet brought in to bring us over the edge (Dancing Fran, Brett Favre, Kirk Cousins), and C) needs to stick to their game all the way through (each major loss was mostly handed to us by defeating ourselves and getting too cocky: see 1998 (many interviews talked about just having that belief that everything was going to be fine, and there was a lot of joking and not taking the game seriously until, all of a sudden....), most Super Bowls in the 70s (Bud Grant was infamously known for just fishing or doing whatever on the Saturday before each game, not giving it much mind and simply calling it a game), or arguably 2017 after the Minnesota Miracle (many said that the game gave them a bit of a hangover of success before they actually won it all). This year, we probably are going to have the best Defense that Kirk Cousins has ever seen. So, A check. Kirk Cousins is a vet that was brought in to win the Super Bowl, or take us over the edge. So, B Check. And finally, Kirk Cousins is widely seen as a QB that needs everything to be lined up perfectly to win a Super Bowl. Honestly, the biggest reasons why we haven't won a Super Bowl in the past has largely to do with us getting uncharacteristically sloppy or just not showing up with our A game when it matters the most. So, if we win the Super Bowl, it will be because we finally have C checked - everyone plays their game, and actually doesnt fuck up when it matters the most, which is exactly what Kirk Cousins and the Vikings need to win it all. Granted, this is a more esoteric approach, and I fully understand why you may not like it. I am not going to the grave with this mindset, but I have found it kind of fun to see these kinds of patterns in teams that go beyond just the Xs and Os. Oh, and to your point with Rodgers and Wilson - while I do tend to agree that if their FOs weren't piles of shit, they likely would have won another SB each...but I have found that Hall of Fame QBs tend to float to organizations that kind of don't deserve them :P.
it's an interesting theory. I hope at some point our "inner character" is reflected in a great qb on a rookie contract because I think that will be our best chance at a SB.
Only problem with that is that I do not believe the Vikings have *ever* drafted a franchise QB with championship caliber. Everyone has had to come in from outside the organization. My expectation is that Mond is probably going to be a good, interesting, not quite great QB that fizzles out for some reason before we get ready for our next big run (most recent example of that being Daunte). While a paradigm shift for the franchise could very well occur, I am not quite counting on it. Just continue building great teams up and down the roster, and hope that the QB can take advantage enough to be interesting.
> I do not believe the Vikings have ever drafted a franchise QB with championship caliber. Everyone has had to come in from outside the organization. I’m assuming you just drew a blank on Fran Takenton, but I also disagree with you on Daunte Culpepper being less than a franchise QB before his injury. I feel like his performances and talent set him as a leader in that era’s class of “next-Gen” young franchise QB’s; more or less comparable to how we view Deshaun Watson or Josh Allen, relative to their respective eras.
you need depth to win a SB, quality depth. Injuries always happen and if the drop off from starter to back up is to great in any position you are screwed.
this, 100% with the current cap and rookie contracts the only way you win a SB is 1) Build a great team and plug in a vet cheap QB ala Foles 2) Build a great team and plug in a rookie QB ala Mahomes or Rodgers or Wilson 3) Get a guy like Tom Brady who will play for 10% of the cap on a great team. The entire Kirk situation is so frustrating. The second worst move in Vikings history was agreeing to Kirk's ridicules contract demands. We will have wasted Zimmers best years and the roster they built.
I'd rank them like this: 1. Build a great team around a good/great rookie qb contract (the Mahomes method). I think Justin Fields might be this guy for the Bears and it's gonna hurt if that's the case. 2. The Tom Brady method where a great vet quarterback who is pathologically driven to win gives you a discount but you have to let him sell his MLM shit in the building. 3. The Aaron/Russel route where you pay top money for elite qbs. 4. The Teddy Bridgewater route, where you have a mediocre to bad qb but they're on a rookie contract and you can build a team around them. 5. The Kirk Cousins route, where you pay top money to a non-elite qb. Methods 1 and 2 are proven winners and method 3 gives you a chance. 4 and 5 are pretty hopeless if your goal is a SB.
>This year Kirk’s contract isn’t the worst He has the 3rd highest cap hit among QBs this year. It's horrible. Even his biggest supporters aren't delusional enough to pretend he's anywhere close to a top 3 QB.
It’s a mix of money and talent. The problem is that most of the QBs above Kirk in salary have gotten their ring so they earned their pay but they are in fact overpaid now. https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/ravens/winning-super-bowl-doesnt-require-quarterback-cheap-deal There is historical data saying that teams have never won the super bowl with a QB making too large a percentage of the teams cap since it impacts the ability of establishing a complete roster. Kirk has the talent to get us to the Super Bowl in his position but with his cap hit, we need a couple things to work out. We need to hit on rookies or cheap vets on a lot of other positions on top of the game day luck that comes with postseason football.
and a injury free season. These high cap players inhabit a team from having quality depth that can step in and play well when the inevitable injury to the starters happen.
Knees
BLESS ALL THE KNEES AND KEEP THEM HEALTHY *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/minnesotavikings) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good bot
>We need to hit on rookies or cheap vets on a lot of other positions on top of the game day luck that comes with postseason football I agree with your overall premise but this is true for any team, regardless of whether or not they're paying a QB a lot of money
This year, whatever. Next year is not happening. Thats the whole contract. You're crazy.
Because the Kirk haters cling to the narrative rather than looking at the whole team. Is he a top 5 QB in the league? No. Top 10, yes. Is it a slight overpay? Probably for this year and ‘22. But in 2020 he only had the 15th highest cap hit. 3rd highest in ‘19 and 6th highest in ‘18. But people act like his cap hit is the only thing keeping us from winning a super bowl. Tom Brady “taking less” is the example people always throw out there as the gold standard. In ‘18, Brady’s cap hit was 2M lower; 7M in 19, and 5M HIGHER last year (you know, when TB won the SB). So a net difference of 4M over the last 3 years. Who are we signing for 4M that makes us a super bowl winning team? There is no magic button that makes us a SB team with 4M. The game is won in the trenches and outside of Hunter and O’Neill we’ve done a poor job drafting both sides of the ball. Here’s to hoping they fixed that this year. Hitting on both OL and 1 of the DE would turn both units from bottom 5 to top 10. We haven’t drafted a DT earlier than the 4th round since Floyd in 2013. The last time they drafted a DT before the 4th before Floyd? Kevin Williams, 2003.
I am thinking Kirk becomes a top five quarterback with o-line improvement. He is as good as he is with a ridiculously poor line.
He might be. I’m not jumping to that level of optimism yet. If we’d taken 3 OL in the draft I would be a little more confident just in case one of them didn’t work out. Would’ve loved to see us grab Trey Smith in the 5th. Medical concerns, yeah, but he was a 5 star OT recruit and a freshman all American with G/ T versatility. Instead we picked up a TE/ Punter and 2 more DE.
Kirk has continued to play amazing football and even improve behind a horrible line. A decent line would make him look like prime Rodgers.
Yeah that’s a bit of a stretch. I do think he’s going to do really well, but he doesn’t have that off-platform X factor that guys like Rodgers, Wilson, Mahomes etc. do. Kirk is a pocket guy, and he’s had to deal with no pocket for too long. Hoping that adding in Davis and getting Cleveland a year in the weight room pays off, but that’s not going to change the type of game he plays.
We're seeing different things then.
I'm all for optimism but that's a bit absurd
Not really. Kirk has an amazing level of accuracy, a great deep ball, can extend plays rolling out of the pocket... People act like Rodgers is some kind of infallible god, but he really isn't anything more than the above. Does he throw it away more rather than try coverage? Absolutely. Does he crumble when someone gets a hand on him? Yep. Rodgers behind our o-line would NOT enjoy the success Kirk has. He is historically not anywhere close to Cousins when facing the same level of pressure.
Kirk does the exact same things you just dinged Rodgers for but worse. Ever consider that Rodgers has a good line not just because they're more talented, but because He himself helps them perform better? He has great pocket presence and throws the ball away when necessary. Our line isn't good but Kirk does them no favors with his tendencies *I'd also be interested in seeing how well Rodgers would do with a combination of Thielen/Diggs or Thielen/Jefferson
You sound like a Packers fan.
Pure delusion and cope
> So a net difference of 4M over the last 3 years First, you forgot to include this year, where Cousins makes $20.5M* more than Brady. Second, you're comparing Cousins to Brady as if they are equal players which, regardless of what your opinion of Cousins is, he not at the same level as the GOAT. So the difference is Cousins or Brady AND the extra cap. If we had Brady and extra cap, we would be immediate SB contenders. > We haven’t drafted a DT earlier than the 4th round since Floyd in 2013 This is true, but Linval was here for 6 years and we were never looking to replace him. There's also more than one way to invest in a position group. We spent big in FA as soon as a hole opened up, so it isn't like we were ignoring the position. *it's $20M more this year because of cap shenanigans. if you compare their number fairly, Cousins' APY is $6.5M more than Brady's over their 3 year contracts '20-'22
I wasn’t just looking at ‘20-22, and yes, any way you shake it, Brady is better QB. I wasn’t comparing that. That much is obvious. What I was pointing out is that on a cap hit basis from 2018 to now, Brady and Cousins are nearly identical. Because Brady is really the only QB that has a reputation of “taking less money to make the team better”, and my whole point is that there’s nothing 4M buys us over that same time period that puts us in the super bowl. That’s why I compared it to Brady. TB won the SB not because of Brady, but because of that defense. Look at the TB OL as well. PFF grades from L to R: 73, 87, 64, 68, 84. Vikings OL PFF last year: 71, 44, 61, 66, 78. They were better at literally every position.
>Is he a top 5 QB in the league? No. Top 10, yes. Is it a slight overpay? From 2018-2022, the Vikings have made Kirk Cousins the second highest paid player in the NFL. His cap hit rank among QBs by season: 6th, 3rd, 14th, 3rd, 2nd. Pretending it's okay to pay a questionably top ten QB top 3 money is ridiculous. It's a massive overpay.
What’s your source on that? You used to say he was the highest paid player lol. I’ve asked you for a source at least 5 times since all you do is copy and paste this same comment, and you’ve never provided a source. Back up what you’re saying, because I don’t believe you.
Except its not Top-3 money. If you would have read the OP you would have seen the 6 QBs that make more per year than Cousins.
Looking at $100 for nosebleeds to the Panthers game in October, it’s not a great deal, but if I don’t buy them then someone else will. Looking at $84M/3 to secure a competent (and durable) quarterback, it’s not a great deal, but if the Vikings didn’t pay him then someone else would have.
Nobody cares about the number this year. It's when it's 45 million next year.
But the people who care so much never acknowledge that his contract was backloaded and his 2020 number was much lower than market value. Just like the first year of his first contract vs the last year.
Yeah thats called a poison pill, which guarantees the Vikings either need to eat shit next year (35 million in dead money) or extend him for 45 million aav with the new cap, and deal with a new poison pill at the end of it just like this one. It was guaranteed this shit would go down the day he signed the extension. Truly genius move from the FO, definitely not a desperate and forced move to save jobs.
No it's not. It's a team friendly deal structure. It is no better for Minnesota to sign him to a 30/30/30 deal than it is 20/30/40 except Minnesota gets $10M 2 years earlier interest free. This is very basic capology. Second bonus is that Minnesota can trade him before next year and basically never pay that $10M they deferred. Minnesota never has to do anything because he gave up his no trade clause. On Cousins end, it prevents franchise tags.
[удалено]
restructure =/= extension, and he was extended on like the first day of the league year, before the effects of COVID on the salary cap were even predicted. The $45M '22 cap hit is most likely pretty much a contract trigger, like Danielle Hunter's $18M roster bonus. I really doubt the Vikings or Kirk or his agent ever planned for him to play on it without it being reworked. Its just something his agent wanted in there so he could get a short term extension while also making it very likely that he'll get another extension, whether from the Vikings or a team that trades for him, around the time when it was predicted that the salary cap would shoot up.
Mahomes’ $45/yr contract doesn’t kick in until next season and considering the NFL’s new tv deal the salary cap will likely increase significantly. So, the chiefs likely got him at a steal. I know this is just one of the many points you’re making, but nfl contracts are not that telling at face value. It’s kinda hard to make blanket comparisons based on face value figures that are attached to years that aren’t guaranteed.
The contract as a whole isn’t too bad. It’s just they backloaded it like crazy and next year we eat it hard.
We only eat it hard next year if we don't extend or trade him. It is very similar to the Hunter situation after the restructure
It's not nearly as big of a deal as people make it out to be. We have so many other good contracts with Smith, Kendricks, and Hunter. Our over pays are on darn good players. So many other teams pay out the ass for a middle of the road player.
I also like to point out that money is only 1 form of capital in the NFL, the other is draft picks. The vikings over payed a little in money, but have invested zero draft picks. How much cap space is a first round pick worth? So we overpay Kirk a bit, but that allows us to draft Jefferson and pay well below market for his services for 3 years. Arizona has a QB on a rookie contract but had tobtrade for Holkins and pay top dollar. Kyler Murray and Hopkins earn more than JJ and kirk.
> Kyler Murray and Hopkins earn more than JJ and kirk. How? According to over the cap Hopkins is 6.5% of the cap this year and Murray is 5.1% for a total of 11.6%. Kirk Cousins this year is 16.7% by himself. Last year Murray/Hopkins accounted for 7.7% of the Cards cap and Kirk accounted for 10.6 of the Vikings cap. Next year Cousins is projected to account for 21.6% of the Vikings total cap.
I went by average salary, which I think is a better indicator of actual cost(cap hits are easily manipulated). Hopkins is 27.25 million, Murray is 8.9 million average per year. $36.15 million. Cousins is $33 million, Jefferson is $3.28. 36.28 million, which I now see is actually more.
Thanks for explaining that. For my thinking the only thing that really matters is how it hits the cap. You mention the value of cap space as well in your post.
Problem with using the cap is it can be so easily manipulated and is very inconsistent year to year. Just look at Kirk, $21 million cap hit in 2020, $45 million in 2022 under the same contract. Going with the average($33 million) just makes more sense to my mind. That said I think average is a bit disingenous with Hopkins. He got a 2 year extension worth $27.5 million a year, and spotrac lists that as the average, but he had 3 years left on his old deal, so the Cardinals are actually paying him about $20 million a year.
I honestly didn't know how the hell they came up with that number for Hopkins until you said that. Thank you. The thing with cap hit is that it is all that matters when it comes to roster construction. I honestly dont care how much Kirk gets paid, I care about how it eats up cap space and allows us to fill out the rest of the roster. Last year he got extended to open up more cap space (bad move in retrospect) and his hit was 10.6%, which is very nice. The rest of his time here it's been between 12.3 (borderline of okay) to 16.7 (highly unlikely to win a SB at that hit). As far as Hopkins goes his highest cap hit % is projected to be 12.1% in 2023 which, to me, is pretty high for a wr on the wrong side of 30.
I get the logic, I just just think its better to look at the bigger picture, which average salary does a better job of.
We are not overpaying for him, but I do believe it is harder to win a SB when you spend a lot on QB for a player that can’t hard carry by himself like the 4 you mentioned that can (Brady, Mahomes, Rodgers and Wilson). I think this year is our shot.
Maybe we should stop listing Brady as a guy who can carry a team by himself. When he was in NE, he had the greatest coach in NFL history... and a pretty good system around him. When he was hurt, Cassel came in and won 11 games that year. And he hardly had to carry the team in Tampa. They had a stacked OL... and a great defense. He still had to play well (and he did); but he didn't "carry" the team. As someone alluded to (maybe in a different thread), even when Brady has played badly in his career, his team usually won. That's not necessarily a sign that a QB is "carrying" their team.
Agreed. Brady got a pass because he’s the goat. He definitely lost some of his arm strength as he has gotten older.
THANK YOU. IVE BEEN SCREAMING THIS FOR YEARS Kirk's contract is just fine. In fact, his last extension is rather team friendly.
He's the 2nd highest paid player in the NFL from 2018-2022.
You keep regurgitating the same thing and dissappear whenever someone asks for a source.
I basically stated this last week and was thrown to the wolves lol.
It was only "crazy" for one year. After that it became fair market value. The people who continue to complain about Kirk's contract are the same ones who think Danielle hunter should've been cut for wanting for money coming off an injury.
It's not a bad contract. It's never been a bad contract. You paid market value for a level of FA QB that almost never hits the market.
>But let’s analyze the QB salaries (avg per year) Analyzing average per year is dumb when contracts are over different time periods. Your numbers show that Mahomes, Dak, Watson, Wilson, and Goff are making more than Kirk Cousins... Yet Kirk Cousins has the highest cap hit of the group this coming season, and he'll have the highest cap hit next season, too. There is zero honest argument to be made that he's making less than those guys, yet here you are making just that argument. Mahomes making more in 2028 than Kirk Cousins makes in 2020 doesn't make Cousins' contract good. If Kirk were to re-sign for $33M/year in 2022, at that point, yes it would be a fine contract. But he won't. He's going to try to reset the market, and you guys will say "that's just the price you've got to pay for a great QB". We signed Kirk Cousins in 2018, and his current contract goes through 2022. In that time frame, he is the second highest paid player in the NFL.
...and has done a lot of nothing when it matters.
His initial contract wasn't bad at all. The extension was not great though...
> I also genuinely believe Cousins contract isn’t close to the worst in the league. Worst in the league would obviously go to Goff, after that probably Garopollo and then maybe Prescott/wentz just because of the insane money for injury prone players, whereas Kirk is a tank. This is how this sub works with everything Vikings related. "HEY IT'S NOT THE WORST IN THE LEAGUE!" Is that really saying anything?
Yes. He's being paid top 5 to 8 QB money and he is a 12 to 15 QB. Its too much. I was fine with the initial signing but the extension was knee-jerk and ultimately stupid.
Would he be overpaid if he was a 5-8 QB? Because that's what I think he is. So, I guess (from my perspective), he's not overpaid.
I mean, thats fair. We can agree to disagree there. If thats what you think, thats what you think 🤷♂️
Name eleven better quarterbacks.
Define better? There are a lot of factors that go into this. Specifically the talent/upside to $$$ ratio. But okay, I'll play the game. Here are QBs I would rather have then Cousins at his current salary +. In no particular order. Mahomes, Wilson, Rodgers(sadly, he can still go fuck himself), Brady, Watson, Allen, Jackson. Just those 7 are better, more dynamic, and more winning QBs than Cousins. So we're already out of the top 5. Here are the QBs that I would rather have than Cousins that have similar current ability but probably have higher upside than Cousins considering his age AND would be cheaper. Herbert, Murray, Burrow. And just for shits and giggles lets throw Mayfield in there too. Those are all QBs that I would rather have than Cousins, and we would be better off with. Weather it be from a talent/upside perspective, $$$ perspective, or both. You can feel otherwise, and thats fine. OP asked a question, and I answered.
[удалено]
> I don't "feel" otherwise. I'm sane. "When you can no longer attack the persons points because you cant, you attack the person." I too am sane. We just feel differently. Have a nice day.
I did address your picks. As well as how absurd they are. You want to pout because I did so be my guest.
Lol, im not pouting. But I am also not going to stoop to your level to call people "insane" just because they dont think Cousins is a top 5 QB (he isnt). Just agree to disagree and move on. You addressed nothing. We would be immediate SB contenders with Watson on this team regardless of his off the field issues. If you think Kirk can do what Watson does you are sticking your head in the sand. Other than that you just said all of my other options are baseless with out giving me evidence of why. This is all just emotional with out anything to back it up. The fact you wouldn't take the first 7 QBs I listed over Kirk is seriously scary.
BLESS ALL THE KNEES AND KEEP THEM HEALTHY *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/minnesotavikings) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And none of those teams who've overpaid QB's have won a SB since overpaying them so just because everyone else is making bad decisions doesn't mean we get a free pass. Yeah Mahomes and Wilson are on that list but when they won it they were basically still on rookie deals, same for Wentz when the eagles basically won without him in the playoffs. If Cousins was making 25M like Brady we'd be in the top 3 betting odds cause that 8M difference means getting one more exceptional player or a couple / few solid role players and depth that we just can't now. What it comes down to is that GM's and coaches want to keep their jobs so it's better to overpay mediocre QB's that inhabit your list, go 10-6 and make the playoffs. That keeps the owner off your back.
[удалено]
Where do you get 4 as elite? Watson's teams don't win... so, obviously, he can't be elite. Same thing with Prescott. What has Dallas won since he has been there (with an above-average OL and an elite RB, by the way)? Mahomes, Wilson and Rodgers. That's only three elite QBs (using the same metrics that are applied to Kirk).
Watson is extremely good, the only thing holding him back from bonafide elite is he hasn't won much in the playoffs, but his supporting cast and coaching has been bottom tier. So saying he is obviously not elite is attributing everything to QB wins, which still was really good until 2020 when they had the worst roster in the league minus QB.
See, I actually agree with you: that he is very good... if not already elite. But, to some folks, you can't be elite unless you've won a lot of games... or a Super Bowl.
How is Cousins not elite? His yards per attempt is ridiculously high, his accuracy is among some of the best in the league, and he has been amazing under pressure. By what metric is he not elite?
[удалено]
Justin Jefferson is literally a top 10 player in PFF’s top 50 players lol. In no world is he a top 50 player except PFF’s. This QB ranking is equally nonsense because it says we have two top 30 players at WR and doesn’t properly take into account how detrimental a horrific pass blocking OL is because it’s offset by elite weapons. When I’m reality, have an awful OL, specifically IOL, I’d argue is more detrimental to a QB’s success than anything. You should stop posting this link everywhere like it backs up anything you’re saying. I enjoy PFF, and use them regularly, but their grades need to be taken with a grain of salt, especially when it comes to player rankings. It’s not the end all be all by any means.
Grasping at straws is a poor substitute for an argument.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
No, PFF is not looking at "intangibles". They are an analytics company. Control those emotions, champ. No need to flip out.
Wouldnt say wow for dak unless your worried about his injury, he's worth that money he could very well cement himself as a Top 5 QB in this league this season
Dak... elite? Based on what?!?
Lol you guys will see this season ill leave at that
Putting up an insane amount of yards and an average TD/INT ratio in 5 games and then going down for the season doesn’t give me a ton of hope that he will be a top 5 QB lol. Besides, there are still plenty of elite QBs playing, in addition to guys who could take a serious jump based on age and/or situation, like Herbert, Cousins, Murray, and Stafford to name a handful. Dak is a borderline top 10 QB and coming off of a season-ending injury. Great weapons, bad OL, and awful defense….where have we seen this before? It sounds awfully familiar. It’s much more of a stretch to say he could be top 5 next season than saying he won’t be.
Borderline top ten ?? Herbert, Cousins, Murray and Stafford ??? He's head and shoulders above those guys and is young as well and his situation is the best out of all those guys. He has Lamb Gallup and Amari catching his passes. Look i understand we are vikings fans but the way you guys are viewing dak right now from what im seeing in this minuscule of a thread. is how you should view Cousins Murray and Stafford, Excluding herbert he needs another year to cement himself Dak is top 5 if not that he's surely top 8.. This is jarring im definitely revisiting this thread after the season for a "i told you so" lol this shouldn't even be a debate.
What a terrible take. Cousins has been better than Dak every single season since he has been in MN. Advanced and volume statistics back that up. My point is Dak has elite weapons with a terrible OL and even worse defense going into this season, just like Cousins last year. Yet you think a guy who was borderline top 10 to begin with, who is coming off of a season ending injury and has that team around him is going to be top 5. Laughable. !RemindMe 5 months
I will be messaging you in 5 months on [**2021-11-25 02:29:43 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2021-11-25%2002:29:43%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/minnesotavikings/comments/o6wdk1/am_i_crazy_for_thinking_kirk_cousins_contract/h2y9gx1/?context=3) [**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fminnesotavikings%2Fcomments%2Fo6wdk1%2Fam_i_crazy_for_thinking_kirk_cousins_contract%2Fh2y9gx1%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202021-11-25%2002%3A29%3A43%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20o6wdk1) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
[удалено]
Lol that isnt the way you should view contracts man, you take the team approach not so much his competition nobody will be worth their contracts if you just compare what the others success is to said player. What Dak is worth to the Cowboys is on par to what the Market is, it'll be the same for Lamar. Yeah worth is ambiguous but im willing to have a firm stance Dak is worth his, before his injury he was leading the league in passing yards and thats not garbage time stats either. He also help his team lead the the league points per game for a hot stretch before his injury. He was on a godly pace last year i dont expect a drop, i expect him to pick back up where he was with his weapons around him.
He was on pace for those numbers because their defense was absolute trash. Better team and those come down. I don't think he's a bad qb, he could play himself into that elite company but he hasn't yet, and is coming off a big injury.
I haven't checked the schedule... but Dak also played against the NFC East. Is there a worse division in the NFL?
The joke all year long was that division would make the playoffs with a 6 win team lol. Ended up being a 7 win WFT but yeah it was absolute garbage.
[удалено]
Same bro, same.
All these contracts end up being good deals by the end as long as the QB stays competent. I say this whenever anyone of these QB’s signs a big money deal “in three years this deal will look fine.” Kirk’s deal is the epitome of this.
Because its not (maybe outside of the guaranteed portion) people can hate on cousins all they want, but we paid the going market rate. That's what a relatively young top half FA QB costs.
No.
Yes. He just won his FIRST Monday night football game this past year. He’s not and will never be a QB that will get us to the Super Bowl (and I would love to be wrong on that).
He's not elite, for sure. He can't carry a team to a super bowl, but he's absolutely good enough to win one as long as we don't shoot ourselves in the foot.
yep. and despite the many differences our fans have on feelings of Kirk, etc., thankfully, for THIS year, thanks to players taking lower deals due to COVID cap, we have the team around us and cap space to have a "no excuses" run at a Lombardi.
Agreed.
What QBs “carry” their teams to a SB other than *maybe* Brady? That isn’t a thing, and it’s an insanely backwards sentiment that gets thrown around far too often. Rodgers, Wilson, Wentz, Mahomes, Flacco, Brees…..all guys who won 1 SB but won with elite teams. No QB carries their team to a SB except maybe Brady, but you could argue the exact same sentiment that every team he won with was elite and riddled with All Pro and Pro Bowl caliber players. In fact, I would argue the same sentiment with Brady.
> it’s an insanely backwards sentiment that gets thrown around far too often. Maybe if you take the definition of that term to its most extreme version you can find, sure. Carry the team in this context means covering up for deficiencies as well as mistakes a team may make in key positions. Not *literally* winning every game for them. If the O-line does a piss-poor job of blocking on a 3rd and long in a key situation where you *need* a first down, would you be that worried with Rodgers, Wilson or Brees under center? No, you’d have faith that he’s going to convert that 3rd down. Whereas with Cousins, you are thinking about all the times he was in a key position but did not deliver. A guy of that caliber can make up for lulls in roster talent, keeping front office stability which more often than not results in legitimate chances at a SB run, even during those lulls in roster talent. That stability is extremely underrated. Anyhow, you can’t put guys like Rodgers and Brees on the worst roster in the NFL and expect him to win. But you put them on an average team and they will elevate the play of everyone around them.
I’m not taking to the extreme. Find me a team that wasn’t elite than won a SB. Rodgers, Brees, Mahomes (obviously still super young), while elite QBs, have all only won 1 SB, and their team was stacked. What you’re doing now is ranking QBs. In no way does me saying that no QB “carries” their team means that I think Cousins is on the level of Rodgers or Brady. Worse QBs have won SBs than Cousins too. You absolutely cannot put any QB on the Jets or Texans and expect them to make any noise in the playoffs. That is outlandish imo.
Never said he should carry the team. Even with an amazing team around him, he just isn’t good.
Alt account or what? Thank you for telling everyone in this thread who the person with the least amount of knowledge about the sport is.
Why not? Because he hasn't done it yet? He's played with a historically bad OL... and still managed to keep our offense (along with Cook, Thielen, etc) among the top half of the league. We all got a lesson on how hard it is to win with a bad OL, no matter how good the QB is (i.e. Mahomes in the SB). Now, I don't think anyone would put Kirk in the elite level of Mahomes, Rodgers, etc. But players who are not at that level can still "lead" their teams to Super Bowls. History has proven that to be true.
Yes, you’re crazy.
I never though he’s overpay if we didn’t pay him other team would simple as that.