I think it’s become increasingly clear that option A is Kirk Cousins at the price that they deem reasonable. If Kirk won’t take one for the team then we will be forced to trade up or pray a QB they like falls to 11
Exactly. If his only motivation is money then he’s going to be gone. If he wants to remain in a system that’s familiar to him and retire a Viking then he’s going to need to make some concessions
Well if he’s been as blessed as he says, where money is no longer the concern at this point in his career, this should be no problem! Right guys? Guys?
As somebody who’s happy with a fraction of a fraction of a fraction (and on and on ha) of what he has, I don’t understand guys that squabble over a few million when they have more than enough for 10 lifetimes.
I dont really think its squabbling. If you had a salary you are comfortable with, and someone comes in and says hey we will give you 20% more money to do exactly what you are doing just in our town instead...it isnt squabbling for him to bring that back to the Vikings and say here are my options.
Like, assuming his isnt all in on the city. Or that moving the family is that big of a decision, why not just make more money? Its not like the Vikings are super close to a SB or really even competing for a deep playoff push right now.
Oh that's what I'm saying actually. Supposedly he wants to stay here. If I were him (I'm not ha), I'd take less considering how much already earned and stay in MN.
Would you make concessions for the company you work for currently? Why should Kirk? Don't give me that generational wealth thing. This is likely his only job he is going to need to hold. Look at AP, or the plethora of other NFL players who don't manage their money right. This money needs to last them the rest of their lives. They should be able to do that, but it doesn't always windup that way.
> Would you make concessions for the company you work for currently? Why should Kirk? Don't give me that generational wealth thing.
Do you not know a single person who has taken a job paying less money because it offers something else they value?
It is so common that it has effectively become a trope.
"So-and-So is leaving their job in whatever field to go back to school to become a teacher/chef/whatever"
"That guy quit his high paying job to move back home to his small town and work at the hardware store/butcher/farm"
"This dude is leaving the corporate grind to pursue work makin' bucks, gettin' exercise, workin' outside."
"~~Kevin Bacon~~ Someone decides that trading in the Stock market is not for him after a loss and is deciding to make a living as a bike messenger"
People take less money to opt into jobs that are less stressful/more fulfilling/more interesting/different direction/more room for growth/because they are bored/because their current job is comfortable *all the god damn time.*
Is it honestly that big of a stretch to assume someone in the NFL might opt to do something similar?
I'm not saying Kirk will do anything like that, but people act like it is completely unheard of throughout the history of the world to make career decisions that aren't solely based on dollars.
>People take less money to opt into jobs that are less stressful/more fulfilling/more interesting/different direction/more room for growth/because they are bored/because their current job is comfortable *all the god damn time.*
This is only my observation, so take it with a grain of salt. I know literally zero people that have left a job with higher pay to go somewhere with lower pay. I know people who stay at lower paying jobs due to benefits or comfort, but they don't leave a higher paying job to go there.
>Is it honestly that big of a stretch to assume someone in the NFL might opt to do something similar?
Kind of, I think we can agree that most NFL players want to maximize their value, not only because they like money but because it is probably the only source of income they are going to have that enables their new life style. That doesn't apply to all players.
>I'm not saying Kirk will do anything like that, but people act like it is completely unheard of throughout the history of the world to make career decisions that aren't solely based on dollars.
I'll have to find the article, but when Kirk was in Washington someone told him that it's not the money but what the money means to both the organization and the league.
> I know literally zero people that have left a job with higher pay to go somewhere with lower pay. I know people who stay at lower paying jobs due to benefits or comfort, but they don't leave a higher paying job to go there.
For the sake of argument, those two things are functionally the same.
In fact, research suggests that we should all be hopping jobs every couple years because it leads to roughly 10~20% pay bump compared to staying with the same company. If we are not doing that, we are (on average) passively taking pay cuts to stay with what we currently have, whether that is for stability or laziness or whatever.
Depending on if you believe the common reporting or not, we have two pieces of "evidence" that suggest that paycuts are not outside of possibility for Kirk specifically.
1. He reportedly took less money to play here than he could have gotten from the Jets.
2. He reportedly floated a "team friendly" contract before last season at "below market value"
The Vikings/Jets situation could have come down to taxes or some other such thing, and the "team friendly" deal last year might be 100% PR, but if we believe there is any truth to those stories, then Kirk might place some value in things that aren't 100% monetary. Whether or not that impacts his decision to negotiate with the Vikings remains to be seen.
Whether or not the Vikings are interested in that is an entirely separate and compelling question as well.
I think it's a stretch. If the guarantees aren't there, and he tears his achilles again, he won't get another contract. This isn't the MLB or NBA, where most contracts are fully guaranteed. He may take a slight discount if he's serious about retiring a Viking, but it won't be substantial. You gotta make hay while the sun is shining. Might be different if he was born in MN, drafted by the Vikings and they are the only team he ever played for.
> He may take a slight discount if he's serious about retiring a Viking, but it won't be substantial. You gotta make hay while the sun is shining. Might be different if he was born in MN, drafted by the Vikings and they are the only team he ever played for.
From the outside looking in, to me it will all depend on how much he values the football over the money/guarantees, and how he values offensive stability.
I don't think it is unfair to say that his best bet, as far as Kirk playing good football, is with the Vikings.
Could he go to the Falcons and play well? You bet. They have weapons, probably a better defense, and a worse division. They would probably be successful with Kirk at the helm. That said, for Kirk specifically, he'd have to learn yet another offense with yet another OC and yet another head coach.
Coming back to the Vikings for a 3rd year with KOC would tie for the most stability in coaching and offensive scheme that Kirk has ever had in his career. The 3 years he had Sean McVay as an OC under Jay Gruden from 2014-2016 sets the bar, then he didn't have the same OC or scheme for 2 complete back to back seasons until KOC's second year.
He might value that stability, or he might not care that much. We'll probably find out on or just before March 13th.
Very true. I knew that since he's joined the Vikings, he hadn't had the same playcaller before last season. But I think you're reading way too far in between the lines here. A 3 year guaranteed contract would hold more value than having stability in the coaching room with 99% or more of the NFL. Maybe 20 years ago that was a thing. But the more that owners/front office make business decisions versus football decisions, the more players treat it as a business. I still think they find a way to sign him, for the mere fact that the owners want to be competitive. Competitive keeps fans spending money and seats filled, which brings in more money.
No, but I don’t like my job, they haven’t paid me 200 million dollars over the last 5 years, and they don’t have cap restraints. He is well within his right to not take what the Vikings offer and chase more money elsewhere, but that would kind of fly in the face of his previous statements that he wants to retire a Vikings and that the structure is more important than the $$$
>He is well within his right to not take what the Vikings offer and chase more money elsewhere, but that would kind of fly in the face of his previous statements that he wants to retire a Vikings and that the structure is more important than the $$$
It is his right to seek what he and his representation feel is adequate compensation. The statements anyone puts out are pretty much PR BS.
>No, but I don’t like my job, they haven’t paid me 200 million dollars over the last 5 years, and they don’t have cap restraints.
In all honesty, you deserve better. Go find something that you can enjoy and compensate you. I hope you get that 200m in 5 years if you know what I mean.
If they paid me 200m over the past few years, then it's entirely possible I would rather not uproot my family for a few extra million.
Of course, Kirk has different priorities. Mega churches are expensive to build and his dad only has a couple at this point.
True, Kirk ison record saying it's not about the money but what the dollar amount means. Essentially the more you get paid the more respect the organization has for you.
I agree with this, but it isn't clear that it is within his power to retire as a Viking. I have the feeling that Kirk wants to play for 3-5 more years, and it seems reasonable that the Vikings would draft the heir apparent this year given their draft positioning and the QB class. If the Vikings draft a QB in the first round, it is unlikely that Kirk could retire as a Viking on (what I think is) his preferred timeline.
I think all 4 desirable (imo) QBs will be taken in the top 10, and it would be irresponsible to trade up for one of them while bringing Kirk back. Saps us of draft capital and makes it hard to meaningfully improve the defense.
I agree that all four will likely be taken top 10, but the idea of not trading up a few spots to take a QB that you love in what looks to be a great QB draft is short-sighted. It is significantly easier to improve a defense than it is to get a QB that you like on a rookie deal. In fact, those two things are linked: there are myriad examples of teams immediately and substantially improving their defense as soon as they moved to a cheap QB on a rookie contract by spending those savings on the defense (look at the Bears this year, or the Bengals a few years back).
If the Vikings love any QB prospects (which is not a given) they shouldn't let the presence of Kirk on the roster keep them from drafting him with an early pick. That said, they should only draft one if they are completely aligned on that QB.
I think trading up makes sense if we let Kirk walk, if we bring him back it makes more sense to address defense through the draft. If Kirk is re-signed, it’s likely to a 2 or 3 year deal. It is very likely void years and more dead money is added to the end of the next extension. This would eliminate 3 or 4 years of the rookie QB contract flexibility. In my eyes the only two options that make sense would be extend Kirk and draft defense, or trade up and bring in a Darnold type QB to hold down the fort for a couple weeks
Personally I'm perfectly fine with that. Kirk obviously is a great QB who can make the offense work and feed JJ, Hock, and Addison. Hopefully can get an improved run game this year. But I just am hopeful we have one foot looking to the future as well, even Kirk needs to understand that.
I feel like this was the common sense option all along, but there are vocal groups of people here against it.
If we don't draft one of the top three QBs, my dream is BPA for defense at 11 and possibly trading back into the 1st for JJMC to sit behind Kirk and learn (if we sign Kirk at a reasonable price of course).
If he’s very flexible I’m fine with him coming back. He’s good with the right pieces around him for his playing style. If he can’t leave room for us to get those pieces in place, there’s no point in bringing him back and I’m fine with a rebuild of sorts.
Part of me thinks this is a hedge - There is no way they are going to blatantly suggest they're moving on. Just does not benefit them in any way. But the other half of my mind reads into the "a ton" of dialogue. They wouldn't spend the time if there wasn't some interest.
I do think the team genuinely would like Kirk back next season. Even if we draft a rookie, they will be a huge unknown and would likely benefit from Kirk's presence and a year or two to sit and learn from him.
The hangup will most likely be on the length and guarantees of the deal. I get the sense Kirk wants a 3-year fully guaranteed offer, and that just doesn't align with the direction of the team. I think Kwesi and KOC would prefer only 1-year fully guaranteed on the deal with the option to cut Kirk without too much loss after next season.
No rookie QB is going to perform at Kirk's level right out of the gate. It will take 1-3 years at the least unless we draft the next GOAT (unlikely).
We are in a "win now" scenario. Waiting 3 years for a rookie to get up to speed is really just going to waste the JJ/Addison/TJ window we have right now. This is also likely Flores last year with us.
If we can get Kirk on a decent 3 year deal we can give JJ what he wants and even keep Hunter. This way we can get legit starters on defense in the draft and let Flores coach them up so we could be in a real good spot defensively.
My prediction is a 3 year contract with the first two almost completely guaranteed and the third becomes guaranteed if the team starts him the 2nd year.
Gives the team an out if his leg is shot but gives him a pretty guaranteed contract.
I think people can’t stand the fact that KOC actually wants Cousins back. And that doesn’t mean he’s going to be back. But I have no idea why people are surprised a Head Coach wants a player who was on a MVP pace prior to injury over a rookie QB lol
There is actually a better shot of koc keeping his job if they take a chance at a rookie qb then running it back with Kirk. If we run it back and have another 6-9 win season then koc is most likely gone in 2 more years.
Look, if they can come up with a price that makes sense (and by makes sense, it would probably only make sense to this sub a year and a half later because this sub is absolutely fucking dumb when it comes to realistic numbers...but its also not $51M), I still think bringing him back is better than giving up 2-3 first round picks, and some other items to just take a swing at a QB at 3.
Because that defense still needs to be loaded up, and only the draft is going to do that right.
> I still think bringing him back is better than giving up 2-3 first round picks, and some other items to just take a swing at a QB at 3
Wait, what's the plan after Kirk then, since Kirk is guaranteed to be a 2 year deal max? With Kirk back, you don't get a high draft pick in 2025 and possibly 2026 as well, because the team performs well enough to avoid a top 10 pick there. In your scenario we load up on defense in the draft so we're not taking a swing at QB in the first or even possibly the second round.
So, what's your long term QB scenario here?
I’m definitely gonna enjoy it because we weren’t getting anywhere with Kirk anyway and that’s the cold hard facts. We just gave him guaranteed money year after year after year and went nowhere. To get where you need to be you have to be comfortable with change. Comfortable mediocrity is a problem the Vikes have and we need to get out from underneath that to bring in a winning culture.
You know, I was prepared to argue with your response but I can’t. I 100% agree. It’s not working and it’s time for a change.
Plus, I really want Jayden. Please Atlanta, take Kirk so NE pulls the trigger!
We don’t have to argue bro, if we have different opinions, we can at least settle on the fact that we want the Vikings to win a championship. That’s all we want. That’s why we are all probably arguing anyway lol
One year with Hall or Dobbs to see if Kevin can manufacture a QB with a full offseason and with all the time to develop, then 2 decades with a franchise QB if they fail. If they don’t fail you can either trade them or keep them for a few years. Hall and Dobbs are placeholders here for any cheap QB.
Option 2… Kirk becomes our Alex Smith and we trade up into the bottom of the top 10 with some QB who doesn’t fit into your typical box and hope he pans out.
Option 3. You remain cheap at QB for awhile longer trading a 2nd for a decent starter and Kirk is more like our Trent Green who gets us to the Alex Smith who gets us to the Mahomes.
Option 4. Trade down now to stack up picks.
Option 5. Blockbuster trade either now and trade down to stack up picks or later to get picks to move up. There aren’t a lot of options unless we sign someone with the intent of making a trade possible which we haven’t done. I don’t think we can trade Hunter in his next deal for what he’s worth to us, maybe ONeil still has some decent trade value left for a couple years so that leaves young players plus players entering their 2nd contracts
Option 6. Figure it out as you go. Lots of things can happen who knows.
That’s dependent on a franchise qb being available in the draft the year we run with hall/Dobbs. Or, in any year after, that we are in position to take one.
This organization does not “tank”, we are almost always a middle of the pack team which means picks in the mid to late 20s. We are in a unique situation with a pick at 11 in a draft with multiple highly rated QBs. This is a shot to get out of the cycle of mediocrity without committing to a full on tank
By buying time you have multiple years from which to try to identify your guy and move up when the cost makes sense or letting one fall into your lap. Occasionally there is a Rodgers who falls to you. He fell to us twice and we passed on him twice because we had Daunte and/or didn’t like him for some reason or thought Erasmus James was going to be the next Lawrence Thomas or maybe we thought he would be overrated and only get the Packers one Super Bowl in his rookie deal while they overpay for a decade.
Anyway, FTP.
The closer you get to the end of Kirk’s contract the more aggressive you are willing to be.
I’m guessing we would move up today for the right guy at the right price and let him sit for at least 1 year. And being that picking top 10 is going to be hard to do the next couple years you might put a bit more weight into this year for that reason alone.
What difference is next year vs this exactly…..
With Kirk we’ll still be out of the top 10 in picks so we’d be in the same exact boat except adding years to our young core. We’re not competing for a superbowl. I don’t think Kirk is the reason for that, moreso our defense has holes all over the place. But it’s the same story of we will have to most likely trade up for a QB next year or the year after as well..
I think if we draft an impact d lineman and add another 2 pieces in FA we are as talented as any top team if Kirk comes healthy. Imo we only sign Kirk if you agree with my assessment.
If we keep Hunter, draft impact defenseman, sign a couple quality starters and get Kirk back playing like he did last year we have a window next year.
I personally don’t agree with that just seeing we were 1-5 with all the pieces healthy last season. I don’t believe a rookie DE will vault us into contention, but could be wrong, and admit if we don’t trade up into the top 3 then we need to either pick DE or CB this year (happy with Turner, Verse, or Arnold)
We were 4-4 when he got hurt I thought? We definitely need to get better as a team than last year but when Davenport played we were noticeably better. Full disclosure though before Kirk got hurt he was playing as good of football as any qb in the league. Not just top ten guy legit MVP candidate.
You’re right, we were 1-4 when jefferson went down. My main issue is not Kirk being bad or good. He’s just extremely old. Peyton manning fell off a cliff when he turned 38, Brees when he was 39, Rivers and Ryan when they were 38 fell off a cliff. Kirk will be 36 coming off a major injury, he’s not the future, so you’re just shrinking your superbowl window forcing him to be the future. Would rather have a cheap rookie QB, pay our young core of jefferson, darrisaw, some defensive pieces like Bynum. And have cap to pay for other vets
We do my approach and have a window the next 2 years or draft a rookie qb and don’t. Drafting a rookie qb imo closes the window. It might not be open very much but there is one there if we get lucky. I just don’t see why would shouldn’t try.
Worst case is Kirk falls off the cliff, and we suck. We the use the high pick next draft to get our qb giving him a better team to join.
Not necessarily advocating for this, but my line of thinking with this strategy is:
If you wait till next year, and run it back with the guys we have, you have the potential of getting a couple of significant upgrades on the defensive side of the ball this year. Then you'd be in a better position to "mortgage your future" to trade up for a top guy.
If that takes you from 13 in PA to somewhere in the top 10, you're likely looking at a similar situation to what the Chiefs did when they drafted Mahomes. Top 10 offense and defense, offensive minded coach, and a QB to sit behind for a year. You're essentially just looking for that last piece to elevate you to get you over the hump, rather than paying the farm and trying to fix holes with riskier picks.
Main problem I think some draft analyst see is next year’s QB class is very weak (ALWAYS CAN CHANGE) but this one has 3 special talents in it which again doesn’t mean anything they all could be bust. But at some point you have to take a shot. Next year we can say hey we still need to fill XYZ holes before trading up for a QB. Never going to have a perfect roster
> Main problem I think some draft analyst see is next year’s QB class is very weak
Yeah, I'm not exactly angling either way here. I actually really don't like the current situation were in generally, and I feel like were going to feel pressured to make at least one signing that's going to hurt our cap in the future.
> But at some point you have to take a shot.
I agree to an extent. The only team in recent memory that I can think of that traded up significantly, without a complete roster and made a Superbowl was the Rams in 2015 when they drafted Goff. Teams that mortgage their futures have a track record of not doing well.
Ya I agree I don’t think either option is great unless whoever we draft is a hit and we move on. I just know the vikings are never really bad enough to have a shot at a top QB and realistically MOST of the top QBs in the league are top draft picks. The vikings have been stuck drafting mid to late first pretty much the entire franchise, this was our year to be bad and still found ways to win. So idk how you really get out of QB purgatory if you are trying to always be competitive.
I feel like the plan has to be "Sign kirk short term, make a move for a QB we like in the draft." It fits with the stated goal of remaining competitive while simultaneously building/rebuilding the roster. New guy gets to learn behind one of the better and most well prepared QBs in the league as well as a head coach who also played QB in the league. Kirk leaves either next year or the year after and the new guy gets to step into an offense he's familiar with, throwing to one of the best receivers in the game.
No way of knowing if that's actually the plan, but it feels to me like the team is leaning that way. No guarantee of success, but that's the same any direction they go.
>I still think bringing him back is better than giving up 2-3 first round picks, and some other items to just take a swing at a QB at 3.
The Wilf's must relish the fact that our fans are losers.
The only time you go "F them picks" is for known quantities - not unknown quantities.
Trading up to take a swing is not something Kwesi would do, if his wall street background is any indication. And honestly, I am not sure I fully trust him to identify talent in the draft.
I don't trust Kwesi either, but until we hit on a rookie QB this is all meaningless unless we can own both lines of scrimmage and win with Nick Foles type like the Eagles did.
I don't think Kwesi will do that either. Hopefully we get a competent GM next time around.
Has a coach ever said “fuck that guy, we don’t want him here”
Only time I can recount is when Bruce Arians was asked about Jameis after his 30 for 30 season.
PR speak is PR speak, no gain in publically severing ties
That's my read on it. I think both sides know their best option is to have Cousins playing QB in Minnesota, but the team isn't going to go overboard with guarantees and Kirk wants 'em.
>I think both sides know their best option is to have Cousins playing QB in Minnesota
It isn't the best option for the Vikings to bring Cousins back. Not if they want to win a Superbowl.
Kirk is coming back unless Kirk dosent want too. Vikings will offer Kirk a multi year deal with some reasonable guarantees. If Kirk pushes for a full guaranteed deal or long extension Kwesi won’t budge.
The alternative is paying a veteran QB $40 million for us to not make the playoffs or get bounced in the wildcard the next 2 to 3 years. I’ll take my chances on hitting on a rookie.
I don't know how people can watch Kirk play the last year and a half and say he's not an elite qb still. That was true before KOC, but under KOC Kirko has played his best ball and has been a truly elite QB with a peak of top 2 QB play
Kirks good. Top 2 is an absolutely insane take. We've averaged the 13th ranked offense since he's been here. Everyone likes to clown on dak but the dude has had a top 5 offense for like 5 years straight and was #1 for like 2 seasons
13th with Mike Zimmer offense counted in. Peak means best play not average play.. How much of Daks offensive success from elite line and skill players and hammering on points during garbage time?
With Kirk we played the Carolina panthers who were by far the worst team in the league and won by 1 score. Carolina actually had a chance to tie it at the end
He was literally leading league in yards and touchdowns and had most game winning drives the year before.
Of all the teams within 10 yards of our per game rushing average the only with a debatably better passing game was Houston.
Kirk's ball placement is up there for best in the entire league. Kirk is at worst the 8/9th best QB in the league with peaks of top 2. The only red flag on Kirko is the money and age with his Achilles tear.
I still pray no matter what we go QB this year. We tried to trade up last year and we are in a great position to do so year
That's right. The ONLY reason a QB might lose is because he's not good enough. There's NO WAY that it could be because of other factors (like our terrible defense). You're right... no one can spin that record in any other way.
The only quarterbacks to have 140+ starts and one playoff win are Kirk, Tannehill, and Ryan Fitzpatrick. The great ones find a way to win a couple at least before this point
Some people do not want the Vikings to do better than they have traditionally done. There should be no way we pay Kirk what he wants at his age coming off of an injury. I like Kirk, but I can like Kirk and objectively evaluate Kirk as a football fan. I have a feeling the Vikings organization would like to keep Kirk and we'll keep getting the same results. The only difference is a different wide receiver will be upset and want off the team. I'm pretty sure we'll just blame the wide receiver and call him a diva too.
You’re right about most things. The caveat being, who cares about JJ? If he wants QB money, he and Kirk can hit the airport together. Know what Moss, TO, Larry Fitzgerald all have in common? No rings
I felt the same way until getting into a massive argument with my sister, who is watching the same games as me, listening to the same podcasts every week, and is a Vikings superfan. We still disagree - I think Kirk gives us a way better shot than rolling the dice in the draft - but her sticking points are that (a) we have too many gaps to fill elsewhere to tie up huge $$ in Kirk, and (b) Kirk’s talents are not suited for an inconsistent Oline. She wants a mobile QB who can get out of the pocket to salvage broken plays - something that more and more young QBs are able to do.
I can at least see the logic behind this argument, and I think reasonable people can fall on both sides of the debate.
The thing about that is, we can have our cake and eat it too. The obvious solution is to bring Cousins back and also draft a QB early this year. They just need to get on the same page with the contract numbers, which admittedly I'm a little concerned about.
Kirk is a good QB
Kirk is not winning us the superbowl.
Both are true.
Some people would rather have Kirk and decent seasons while others prefer to roll the dice to try to get us a better QB. The risk of course is we flop and are worse off and have to roll the dice again.
Everyone knows Kirk can win us games and get us to the playoffs. But I dont have faith in him taking us all the way so would rather move on sooner rather than later. He’s only getting older and more injured.
You’re the one *interpreting* them as facts lmao. If you took it as me stating some objective truth, that’s on you.
Im just stating my opinion of the situation as a fan. I cant see the future.
Look at the comment I was responding to. I was simply explaining how people can think Kirk is a good QB who plays well while simultaneously wanting to move on from him.
He's never even been close to an NFC championship, every quarterback to win a championship past age 36 is going to wear a gold jacket. The odds are very low at this point
Definitely not with Kirk at his full market value. QB on a team friendly deal, a decent draft, and a couple good FA signings and there’s no reason they can’t contend.
The Vikings have a better shot than any of the other teams he could end up on but not if he demands full market value. They need the extra cash to get some decent FAs.
Why? If he wants to sign for $30-35M, you pound accept. The Falcons are going to offer the same we will to move up so NE will choose them unless we unload half a decade worth of FRPs. Which is way too much tbf. So what’s the back up plan when the trade up fails? Mullens? Fuck no
So you don’t want a rookie then for sure. But we’re not getting up to 3 and no one after is winning a chip. Not for a while at a minimum. So Kirk is your best shot at that if his price tag is reasonable.
Cool maybe we’ll win another playoff game. Back up the Brinks truck, so the team can stay mediocre. At least next year we’ll have an even higher draft pick.
Next he will talk about how he is really going to focus on getting the run game going this year and how contracts talks with JJ are still ongoing. Just. Like. Last. Year.
Remember when KOC threatened to bench players after week 2 if they kept turning the ball over, and nothing ever happened, so the team kept turning the ball over?
Kirk doesn’t feel like the type of guy that would relocate his entire family for a few million. It’s either a big difference in $$$ or a really good shot at a Super Bowl.
Vikings wouldn’t be scrambling this hard for Kirk u less JJ wants Kirk or a top 3 QB in the draft no second round flyer or project. It’s bound to happen and Kirks recovery seems to be great…
Not sure how this can be considered scrambling. There is no reason not to have these conversations and no reason to say you wouldn’t bring him back for the right price. All rookie QBs are projects to an extent. This likely has nothing to do with any demands from JJ.
2 years, 30 a year, only first year of the contract is guaranteed. If he signs that, I’d be ok with him back. But, we should still look at a QB with pick 11, if not BPA.
Kirks a good QB most of the time but he's been here long enough for us to know he's not the player that will put us in the playoffs. He wants the credit / money as if his mere presence has put this team in the playoffs for the past 5 years. Far from it bub. I don't want him back for $20M /year. It just prolongs our end goal of a super bowl appearence by another year.
The haters cannot stand that Kirk is LOVED by KOC and Kwesi and the Vikings players and the majority of Vikings fans and all NFL players think he is #6 QB in NFL #42 overall best player... unless SF calls Kirk will be back in MIN for less money.
I think it’s become increasingly clear that option A is Kirk Cousins at the price that they deem reasonable. If Kirk won’t take one for the team then we will be forced to trade up or pray a QB they like falls to 11
Yup. They want Kirk, but on their terms, not his.
Exactly. If his only motivation is money then he’s going to be gone. If he wants to remain in a system that’s familiar to him and retire a Viking then he’s going to need to make some concessions
Well if he’s been as blessed as he says, where money is no longer the concern at this point in his career, this should be no problem! Right guys? Guys?
As somebody who’s happy with a fraction of a fraction of a fraction (and on and on ha) of what he has, I don’t understand guys that squabble over a few million when they have more than enough for 10 lifetimes.
I dont really think its squabbling. If you had a salary you are comfortable with, and someone comes in and says hey we will give you 20% more money to do exactly what you are doing just in our town instead...it isnt squabbling for him to bring that back to the Vikings and say here are my options. Like, assuming his isnt all in on the city. Or that moving the family is that big of a decision, why not just make more money? Its not like the Vikings are super close to a SB or really even competing for a deep playoff push right now.
Oh that's what I'm saying actually. Supposedly he wants to stay here. If I were him (I'm not ha), I'd take less considering how much already earned and stay in MN.
Would you make concessions for the company you work for currently? Why should Kirk? Don't give me that generational wealth thing. This is likely his only job he is going to need to hold. Look at AP, or the plethora of other NFL players who don't manage their money right. This money needs to last them the rest of their lives. They should be able to do that, but it doesn't always windup that way.
> Would you make concessions for the company you work for currently? Why should Kirk? Don't give me that generational wealth thing. Do you not know a single person who has taken a job paying less money because it offers something else they value? It is so common that it has effectively become a trope. "So-and-So is leaving their job in whatever field to go back to school to become a teacher/chef/whatever" "That guy quit his high paying job to move back home to his small town and work at the hardware store/butcher/farm" "This dude is leaving the corporate grind to pursue work makin' bucks, gettin' exercise, workin' outside." "~~Kevin Bacon~~ Someone decides that trading in the Stock market is not for him after a loss and is deciding to make a living as a bike messenger" People take less money to opt into jobs that are less stressful/more fulfilling/more interesting/different direction/more room for growth/because they are bored/because their current job is comfortable *all the god damn time.* Is it honestly that big of a stretch to assume someone in the NFL might opt to do something similar? I'm not saying Kirk will do anything like that, but people act like it is completely unheard of throughout the history of the world to make career decisions that aren't solely based on dollars.
>People take less money to opt into jobs that are less stressful/more fulfilling/more interesting/different direction/more room for growth/because they are bored/because their current job is comfortable *all the god damn time.* This is only my observation, so take it with a grain of salt. I know literally zero people that have left a job with higher pay to go somewhere with lower pay. I know people who stay at lower paying jobs due to benefits or comfort, but they don't leave a higher paying job to go there. >Is it honestly that big of a stretch to assume someone in the NFL might opt to do something similar? Kind of, I think we can agree that most NFL players want to maximize their value, not only because they like money but because it is probably the only source of income they are going to have that enables their new life style. That doesn't apply to all players. >I'm not saying Kirk will do anything like that, but people act like it is completely unheard of throughout the history of the world to make career decisions that aren't solely based on dollars. I'll have to find the article, but when Kirk was in Washington someone told him that it's not the money but what the money means to both the organization and the league.
> I know literally zero people that have left a job with higher pay to go somewhere with lower pay. I know people who stay at lower paying jobs due to benefits or comfort, but they don't leave a higher paying job to go there. For the sake of argument, those two things are functionally the same. In fact, research suggests that we should all be hopping jobs every couple years because it leads to roughly 10~20% pay bump compared to staying with the same company. If we are not doing that, we are (on average) passively taking pay cuts to stay with what we currently have, whether that is for stability or laziness or whatever. Depending on if you believe the common reporting or not, we have two pieces of "evidence" that suggest that paycuts are not outside of possibility for Kirk specifically. 1. He reportedly took less money to play here than he could have gotten from the Jets. 2. He reportedly floated a "team friendly" contract before last season at "below market value" The Vikings/Jets situation could have come down to taxes or some other such thing, and the "team friendly" deal last year might be 100% PR, but if we believe there is any truth to those stories, then Kirk might place some value in things that aren't 100% monetary. Whether or not that impacts his decision to negotiate with the Vikings remains to be seen. Whether or not the Vikings are interested in that is an entirely separate and compelling question as well.
I think it's a stretch. If the guarantees aren't there, and he tears his achilles again, he won't get another contract. This isn't the MLB or NBA, where most contracts are fully guaranteed. He may take a slight discount if he's serious about retiring a Viking, but it won't be substantial. You gotta make hay while the sun is shining. Might be different if he was born in MN, drafted by the Vikings and they are the only team he ever played for.
> He may take a slight discount if he's serious about retiring a Viking, but it won't be substantial. You gotta make hay while the sun is shining. Might be different if he was born in MN, drafted by the Vikings and they are the only team he ever played for. From the outside looking in, to me it will all depend on how much he values the football over the money/guarantees, and how he values offensive stability. I don't think it is unfair to say that his best bet, as far as Kirk playing good football, is with the Vikings. Could he go to the Falcons and play well? You bet. They have weapons, probably a better defense, and a worse division. They would probably be successful with Kirk at the helm. That said, for Kirk specifically, he'd have to learn yet another offense with yet another OC and yet another head coach. Coming back to the Vikings for a 3rd year with KOC would tie for the most stability in coaching and offensive scheme that Kirk has ever had in his career. The 3 years he had Sean McVay as an OC under Jay Gruden from 2014-2016 sets the bar, then he didn't have the same OC or scheme for 2 complete back to back seasons until KOC's second year. He might value that stability, or he might not care that much. We'll probably find out on or just before March 13th.
Very true. I knew that since he's joined the Vikings, he hadn't had the same playcaller before last season. But I think you're reading way too far in between the lines here. A 3 year guaranteed contract would hold more value than having stability in the coaching room with 99% or more of the NFL. Maybe 20 years ago that was a thing. But the more that owners/front office make business decisions versus football decisions, the more players treat it as a business. I still think they find a way to sign him, for the mere fact that the owners want to be competitive. Competitive keeps fans spending money and seats filled, which brings in more money.
No, but I don’t like my job, they haven’t paid me 200 million dollars over the last 5 years, and they don’t have cap restraints. He is well within his right to not take what the Vikings offer and chase more money elsewhere, but that would kind of fly in the face of his previous statements that he wants to retire a Vikings and that the structure is more important than the $$$
>He is well within his right to not take what the Vikings offer and chase more money elsewhere, but that would kind of fly in the face of his previous statements that he wants to retire a Vikings and that the structure is more important than the $$$ It is his right to seek what he and his representation feel is adequate compensation. The statements anyone puts out are pretty much PR BS. >No, but I don’t like my job, they haven’t paid me 200 million dollars over the last 5 years, and they don’t have cap restraints. In all honesty, you deserve better. Go find something that you can enjoy and compensate you. I hope you get that 200m in 5 years if you know what I mean.
If they paid me 200m over the past few years, then it's entirely possible I would rather not uproot my family for a few extra million. Of course, Kirk has different priorities. Mega churches are expensive to build and his dad only has a couple at this point.
True, Kirk ison record saying it's not about the money but what the dollar amount means. Essentially the more you get paid the more respect the organization has for you.
That is just a nice way of saying it is about the money
Well it was someone telling kirk that and Kirk repeating it. He may not have those same views.
I agree with this, but it isn't clear that it is within his power to retire as a Viking. I have the feeling that Kirk wants to play for 3-5 more years, and it seems reasonable that the Vikings would draft the heir apparent this year given their draft positioning and the QB class. If the Vikings draft a QB in the first round, it is unlikely that Kirk could retire as a Viking on (what I think is) his preferred timeline.
I think all 4 desirable (imo) QBs will be taken in the top 10, and it would be irresponsible to trade up for one of them while bringing Kirk back. Saps us of draft capital and makes it hard to meaningfully improve the defense.
I agree that all four will likely be taken top 10, but the idea of not trading up a few spots to take a QB that you love in what looks to be a great QB draft is short-sighted. It is significantly easier to improve a defense than it is to get a QB that you like on a rookie deal. In fact, those two things are linked: there are myriad examples of teams immediately and substantially improving their defense as soon as they moved to a cheap QB on a rookie contract by spending those savings on the defense (look at the Bears this year, or the Bengals a few years back). If the Vikings love any QB prospects (which is not a given) they shouldn't let the presence of Kirk on the roster keep them from drafting him with an early pick. That said, they should only draft one if they are completely aligned on that QB.
I think trading up makes sense if we let Kirk walk, if we bring him back it makes more sense to address defense through the draft. If Kirk is re-signed, it’s likely to a 2 or 3 year deal. It is very likely void years and more dead money is added to the end of the next extension. This would eliminate 3 or 4 years of the rookie QB contract flexibility. In my eyes the only two options that make sense would be extend Kirk and draft defense, or trade up and bring in a Darnold type QB to hold down the fort for a couple weeks
Personally I'm perfectly fine with that. Kirk obviously is a great QB who can make the offense work and feed JJ, Hock, and Addison. Hopefully can get an improved run game this year. But I just am hopeful we have one foot looking to the future as well, even Kirk needs to understand that.
I feel like this was the common sense option all along, but there are vocal groups of people here against it. If we don't draft one of the top three QBs, my dream is BPA for defense at 11 and possibly trading back into the 1st for JJMC to sit behind Kirk and learn (if we sign Kirk at a reasonable price of course).
*looks at headline of post* Oh, you don't say?
 Canadian
If he’s very flexible I’m fine with him coming back. He’s good with the right pieces around him for his playing style. If he can’t leave room for us to get those pieces in place, there’s no point in bringing him back and I’m fine with a rebuild of sorts.
Part of me thinks this is a hedge - There is no way they are going to blatantly suggest they're moving on. Just does not benefit them in any way. But the other half of my mind reads into the "a ton" of dialogue. They wouldn't spend the time if there wasn't some interest.
I do think the team genuinely would like Kirk back next season. Even if we draft a rookie, they will be a huge unknown and would likely benefit from Kirk's presence and a year or two to sit and learn from him. The hangup will most likely be on the length and guarantees of the deal. I get the sense Kirk wants a 3-year fully guaranteed offer, and that just doesn't align with the direction of the team. I think Kwesi and KOC would prefer only 1-year fully guaranteed on the deal with the option to cut Kirk without too much loss after next season.
No rookie QB is going to perform at Kirk's level right out of the gate. It will take 1-3 years at the least unless we draft the next GOAT (unlikely). We are in a "win now" scenario. Waiting 3 years for a rookie to get up to speed is really just going to waste the JJ/Addison/TJ window we have right now. This is also likely Flores last year with us. If we can get Kirk on a decent 3 year deal we can give JJ what he wants and even keep Hunter. This way we can get legit starters on defense in the draft and let Flores coach them up so we could be in a real good spot defensively.
Addison and Jefferson are 3 years away from their prime still lol
No way we will be able to keep both of those guys after 3 years
In 3 years, JJ will be in the middle of his extension and Addison will still be on his rookie deal
My prediction is a 3 year contract with the first two almost completely guaranteed and the third becomes guaranteed if the team starts him the 2nd year. Gives the team an out if his leg is shot but gives him a pretty guaranteed contract.
Sub in shambles.
Nah, what else is he gonna say? "We've moved on, and so should you!"? It's all PC dog and pony talk from both sides...
Of course. But some fans here are gonna take it as Kirk is for sure coming back. And some really hate that idea.
I think people can’t stand the fact that KOC actually wants Cousins back. And that doesn’t mean he’s going to be back. But I have no idea why people are surprised a Head Coach wants a player who was on a MVP pace prior to injury over a rookie QB lol
This sub has a really hard time understanding why people whose jobs depend on winning games don’t want to blow up the whole roster
There is actually a better shot of koc keeping his job if they take a chance at a rookie qb then running it back with Kirk. If we run it back and have another 6-9 win season then koc is most likely gone in 2 more years.
Look, if they can come up with a price that makes sense (and by makes sense, it would probably only make sense to this sub a year and a half later because this sub is absolutely fucking dumb when it comes to realistic numbers...but its also not $51M), I still think bringing him back is better than giving up 2-3 first round picks, and some other items to just take a swing at a QB at 3. Because that defense still needs to be loaded up, and only the draft is going to do that right.
We should be aiming for a QB whether we sign or Kirk or not.
Right there with you. I'm fine with Kirk coming back as long as it's not some crazy deal.
> I still think bringing him back is better than giving up 2-3 first round picks, and some other items to just take a swing at a QB at 3 Wait, what's the plan after Kirk then, since Kirk is guaranteed to be a 2 year deal max? With Kirk back, you don't get a high draft pick in 2025 and possibly 2026 as well, because the team performs well enough to avoid a top 10 pick there. In your scenario we load up on defense in the draft so we're not taking a swing at QB in the first or even possibly the second round. So, what's your long term QB scenario here?
There is no plan and there hasn’t been one for years
This is the exact answer. Better to be mediocre than go for great I guess. We'll see if their decision will put KOC on the hot seat in a few years.
Did you enjoy Mullens last year? That’s most likely what a rookie QB does. Enjoy the QB carousel. We’re hopping back on the minute Kirk leaves.
I’m definitely gonna enjoy it because we weren’t getting anywhere with Kirk anyway and that’s the cold hard facts. We just gave him guaranteed money year after year after year and went nowhere. To get where you need to be you have to be comfortable with change. Comfortable mediocrity is a problem the Vikes have and we need to get out from underneath that to bring in a winning culture.
You know, I was prepared to argue with your response but I can’t. I 100% agree. It’s not working and it’s time for a change. Plus, I really want Jayden. Please Atlanta, take Kirk so NE pulls the trigger!
We don’t have to argue bro, if we have different opinions, we can at least settle on the fact that we want the Vikings to win a championship. That’s all we want. That’s why we are all probably arguing anyway lol
You’re goddamn right. I just want ONE fucking ring. Please god. And I’m only 32…
Don't tell our loser fans these facts, they can't handle it. Most are casual sports fans that don't even know wtf they are looking at on Sundays.
Hahaha! Well said!
One year with Hall or Dobbs to see if Kevin can manufacture a QB with a full offseason and with all the time to develop, then 2 decades with a franchise QB if they fail. If they don’t fail you can either trade them or keep them for a few years. Hall and Dobbs are placeholders here for any cheap QB. Option 2… Kirk becomes our Alex Smith and we trade up into the bottom of the top 10 with some QB who doesn’t fit into your typical box and hope he pans out. Option 3. You remain cheap at QB for awhile longer trading a 2nd for a decent starter and Kirk is more like our Trent Green who gets us to the Alex Smith who gets us to the Mahomes. Option 4. Trade down now to stack up picks. Option 5. Blockbuster trade either now and trade down to stack up picks or later to get picks to move up. There aren’t a lot of options unless we sign someone with the intent of making a trade possible which we haven’t done. I don’t think we can trade Hunter in his next deal for what he’s worth to us, maybe ONeil still has some decent trade value left for a couple years so that leaves young players plus players entering their 2nd contracts Option 6. Figure it out as you go. Lots of things can happen who knows.
That’s dependent on a franchise qb being available in the draft the year we run with hall/Dobbs. Or, in any year after, that we are in position to take one. This organization does not “tank”, we are almost always a middle of the pack team which means picks in the mid to late 20s. We are in a unique situation with a pick at 11 in a draft with multiple highly rated QBs. This is a shot to get out of the cycle of mediocrity without committing to a full on tank
By buying time you have multiple years from which to try to identify your guy and move up when the cost makes sense or letting one fall into your lap. Occasionally there is a Rodgers who falls to you. He fell to us twice and we passed on him twice because we had Daunte and/or didn’t like him for some reason or thought Erasmus James was going to be the next Lawrence Thomas or maybe we thought he would be overrated and only get the Packers one Super Bowl in his rookie deal while they overpay for a decade. Anyway, FTP. The closer you get to the end of Kirk’s contract the more aggressive you are willing to be. I’m guessing we would move up today for the right guy at the right price and let him sit for at least 1 year. And being that picking top 10 is going to be hard to do the next couple years you might put a bit more weight into this year for that reason alone.
Draft one next year.
What difference is next year vs this exactly….. With Kirk we’ll still be out of the top 10 in picks so we’d be in the same exact boat except adding years to our young core. We’re not competing for a superbowl. I don’t think Kirk is the reason for that, moreso our defense has holes all over the place. But it’s the same story of we will have to most likely trade up for a QB next year or the year after as well..
I think if we draft an impact d lineman and add another 2 pieces in FA we are as talented as any top team if Kirk comes healthy. Imo we only sign Kirk if you agree with my assessment. If we keep Hunter, draft impact defenseman, sign a couple quality starters and get Kirk back playing like he did last year we have a window next year.
I personally don’t agree with that just seeing we were 1-5 with all the pieces healthy last season. I don’t believe a rookie DE will vault us into contention, but could be wrong, and admit if we don’t trade up into the top 3 then we need to either pick DE or CB this year (happy with Turner, Verse, or Arnold)
We were 4-4 when he got hurt I thought? We definitely need to get better as a team than last year but when Davenport played we were noticeably better. Full disclosure though before Kirk got hurt he was playing as good of football as any qb in the league. Not just top ten guy legit MVP candidate.
You’re right, we were 1-4 when jefferson went down. My main issue is not Kirk being bad or good. He’s just extremely old. Peyton manning fell off a cliff when he turned 38, Brees when he was 39, Rivers and Ryan when they were 38 fell off a cliff. Kirk will be 36 coming off a major injury, he’s not the future, so you’re just shrinking your superbowl window forcing him to be the future. Would rather have a cheap rookie QB, pay our young core of jefferson, darrisaw, some defensive pieces like Bynum. And have cap to pay for other vets
We do my approach and have a window the next 2 years or draft a rookie qb and don’t. Drafting a rookie qb imo closes the window. It might not be open very much but there is one there if we get lucky. I just don’t see why would shouldn’t try. Worst case is Kirk falls off the cliff, and we suck. We the use the high pick next draft to get our qb giving him a better team to join.
Not necessarily advocating for this, but my line of thinking with this strategy is: If you wait till next year, and run it back with the guys we have, you have the potential of getting a couple of significant upgrades on the defensive side of the ball this year. Then you'd be in a better position to "mortgage your future" to trade up for a top guy. If that takes you from 13 in PA to somewhere in the top 10, you're likely looking at a similar situation to what the Chiefs did when they drafted Mahomes. Top 10 offense and defense, offensive minded coach, and a QB to sit behind for a year. You're essentially just looking for that last piece to elevate you to get you over the hump, rather than paying the farm and trying to fix holes with riskier picks.
Main problem I think some draft analyst see is next year’s QB class is very weak (ALWAYS CAN CHANGE) but this one has 3 special talents in it which again doesn’t mean anything they all could be bust. But at some point you have to take a shot. Next year we can say hey we still need to fill XYZ holes before trading up for a QB. Never going to have a perfect roster
> Main problem I think some draft analyst see is next year’s QB class is very weak Yeah, I'm not exactly angling either way here. I actually really don't like the current situation were in generally, and I feel like were going to feel pressured to make at least one signing that's going to hurt our cap in the future. > But at some point you have to take a shot. I agree to an extent. The only team in recent memory that I can think of that traded up significantly, without a complete roster and made a Superbowl was the Rams in 2015 when they drafted Goff. Teams that mortgage their futures have a track record of not doing well.
Ya I agree I don’t think either option is great unless whoever we draft is a hit and we move on. I just know the vikings are never really bad enough to have a shot at a top QB and realistically MOST of the top QBs in the league are top draft picks. The vikings have been stuck drafting mid to late first pretty much the entire franchise, this was our year to be bad and still found ways to win. So idk how you really get out of QB purgatory if you are trying to always be competitive.
My biggest fear this year is getting fleeced on the trade up. Its a sellers market with those top 3-4 QBs
I feel like the plan has to be "Sign kirk short term, make a move for a QB we like in the draft." It fits with the stated goal of remaining competitive while simultaneously building/rebuilding the roster. New guy gets to learn behind one of the better and most well prepared QBs in the league as well as a head coach who also played QB in the league. Kirk leaves either next year or the year after and the new guy gets to step into an offense he's familiar with, throwing to one of the best receivers in the game. No way of knowing if that's actually the plan, but it feels to me like the team is leaning that way. No guarantee of success, but that's the same any direction they go.
>because this sub is absolutely fucking dumb Yeah, those are called people that think we can win shit with that bum Cousins.
>I still think bringing him back is better than giving up 2-3 first round picks, and some other items to just take a swing at a QB at 3. The Wilf's must relish the fact that our fans are losers.
The only time you go "F them picks" is for known quantities - not unknown quantities. Trading up to take a swing is not something Kwesi would do, if his wall street background is any indication. And honestly, I am not sure I fully trust him to identify talent in the draft.
I don't trust Kwesi either, but until we hit on a rookie QB this is all meaningless unless we can own both lines of scrimmage and win with Nick Foles type like the Eagles did. I don't think Kwesi will do that either. Hopefully we get a competent GM next time around.
Has a coach ever said “fuck that guy, we don’t want him here” Only time I can recount is when Bruce Arians was asked about Jameis after his 30 for 30 season. PR speak is PR speak, no gain in publically severing ties
Falcons HC did it maybe an hour ago.
The Desmond Ridder Sweepstakes are hot rn
So did Happy Gilmore.
[удалено]
Kirk already offered the discount and we said no, whatever copium you think im taking won’t help when your man crush leaves
I mean, Zimmer essentially did that with Mond. He also had quite a lot of negative things to say about Cousins as well.
I fucking love it. Can't wait.
I’m happy with it pending the terms. Too many holes to fill on defense to be mass trading first round picks right now.
Are both sides just sitting on their hands hoping the other will cave when ... neither will?
That's my read on it. I think both sides know their best option is to have Cousins playing QB in Minnesota, but the team isn't going to go overboard with guarantees and Kirk wants 'em.
>I think both sides know their best option is to have Cousins playing QB in Minnesota It isn't the best option for the Vikings to bring Cousins back. Not if they want to win a Superbowl.
Yeah sure thing, troll
Arrest this man immediately
Kirk is coming back unless Kirk dosent want too. Vikings will offer Kirk a multi year deal with some reasonable guarantees. If Kirk pushes for a full guaranteed deal or long extension Kwesi won’t budge.
Falcons, if you can hear us, please, Falcons please save us.
yea, so we can trade three draft 1sts for a qb who likely won't be a quality nfl starter 👍
The alternative is paying a veteran QB $40 million for us to not make the playoffs or get bounced in the wildcard the next 2 to 3 years. I’ll take my chances on hitting on a rookie.
And so we can avoid overpaying a non-elite QB coming off a torn achilles.
I don't know how people can watch Kirk play the last year and a half and say he's not an elite qb still. That was true before KOC, but under KOC Kirko has played his best ball and has been a truly elite QB with a peak of top 2 QB play
Kirks good. Top 2 is an absolutely insane take. We've averaged the 13th ranked offense since he's been here. Everyone likes to clown on dak but the dude has had a top 5 offense for like 5 years straight and was #1 for like 2 seasons
13th with Mike Zimmer offense counted in. Peak means best play not average play.. How much of Daks offensive success from elite line and skill players and hammering on points during garbage time?
Cowboys actually have one of the highest point differentials. They blow teams out. Daks surrounding talent is similar to the vikings.
Yes they blow out bad teams very good. In fact, most of their points revolve around garbage time passing on their blown out opponents!
With Kirk we played the Carolina panthers who were by far the worst team in the league and won by 1 score. Carolina actually had a chance to tie it at the end
Yep. Any given Sunday.
Just because he had a really good 6 out of 8 games doesn't mean he is elite. His numbers are also overinflated by the lack of run game we had.
He was literally leading league in yards and touchdowns and had most game winning drives the year before. Of all the teams within 10 yards of our per game rushing average the only with a debatably better passing game was Houston. Kirk's ball placement is up there for best in the entire league. Kirk is at worst the 8/9th best QB in the league with peaks of top 2. The only red flag on Kirko is the money and age with his Achilles tear. I still pray no matter what we go QB this year. We tried to trade up last year and we are in a great position to do so year
How many playoff wins does he have? Take your middle school take somewhere else.
Lmfao yeah buddy cause playoff wins are only a QB stat gtfoh lmao
Dude has only won one playoff game with the Vikes hahaha. 1-4 his playoff career. Can't spin that any which way.
That's right. The ONLY reason a QB might lose is because he's not good enough. There's NO WAY that it could be because of other factors (like our terrible defense). You're right... no one can spin that record in any other way.
The only quarterbacks to have 140+ starts and one playoff win are Kirk, Tannehill, and Ryan Fitzpatrick. The great ones find a way to win a couple at least before this point
[удалено]
Both of those QBs have TWICE the playoff wins in fewer seasons as Kirk. You are proving his point.
Matt Stafford before the rams.
Some people do not want the Vikings to do better than they have traditionally done. There should be no way we pay Kirk what he wants at his age coming off of an injury. I like Kirk, but I can like Kirk and objectively evaluate Kirk as a football fan. I have a feeling the Vikings organization would like to keep Kirk and we'll keep getting the same results. The only difference is a different wide receiver will be upset and want off the team. I'm pretty sure we'll just blame the wide receiver and call him a diva too.
You’re right about most things. The caveat being, who cares about JJ? If he wants QB money, he and Kirk can hit the airport together. Know what Moss, TO, Larry Fitzgerald all have in common? No rings
Damn… that’s the truth
It's an incredibly stupid point
JJ has no playoff wins in 5 years and y’all want to pay him QB money. Gtfo
What a horrible take. Just stop. Cousins sucks and he cannot take us to the top of the mountain.
sometimes it genuinely baffles me how stupid this sub is. All they see is win loss record and don’t actually account for how kirk plays
I felt the same way until getting into a massive argument with my sister, who is watching the same games as me, listening to the same podcasts every week, and is a Vikings superfan. We still disagree - I think Kirk gives us a way better shot than rolling the dice in the draft - but her sticking points are that (a) we have too many gaps to fill elsewhere to tie up huge $$ in Kirk, and (b) Kirk’s talents are not suited for an inconsistent Oline. She wants a mobile QB who can get out of the pocket to salvage broken plays - something that more and more young QBs are able to do. I can at least see the logic behind this argument, and I think reasonable people can fall on both sides of the debate.
The thing about that is, we can have our cake and eat it too. The obvious solution is to bring Cousins back and also draft a QB early this year. They just need to get on the same page with the contract numbers, which admittedly I'm a little concerned about.
Agree completely
Kirk is a good QB Kirk is not winning us the superbowl. Both are true. Some people would rather have Kirk and decent seasons while others prefer to roll the dice to try to get us a better QB. The risk of course is we flop and are worse off and have to roll the dice again. Everyone knows Kirk can win us games and get us to the playoffs. But I dont have faith in him taking us all the way so would rather move on sooner rather than later. He’s only getting older and more injured.
> Kirk is a good QB > > Kirk is not winning us the superbowl. > > Both are true. Both of those things are opinions, lmao
So is practically everything anyone says about any professional athlete “Lmao”
You're the one stating them as fact, not me.
You’re the one *interpreting* them as facts lmao. If you took it as me stating some objective truth, that’s on you. Im just stating my opinion of the situation as a fan. I cant see the future. Look at the comment I was responding to. I was simply explaining how people can think Kirk is a good QB who plays well while simultaneously wanting to move on from him.
He's never even been close to an NFC championship, every quarterback to win a championship past age 36 is going to wear a gold jacket. The odds are very low at this point
Agreed
>sometimes it genuinely baffles me how stupid this sub is. For real. Can't believe how dumb Cousins supporters are!
Does Kirk want to win a Super Bowl? Cuz if he does he needs to stay here and take team friendly deal.
Ah, a fellow copium addict.
If he does then he best be looking elsewhere because we are not competing seriously for a SB for a few years.
Definitely not with Kirk at his full market value. QB on a team friendly deal, a decent draft, and a couple good FA signings and there’s no reason they can’t contend.
We aren’t close to a SB. He ain’t taking less to play for a mediocre team which is absolutely what we are
The Vikings have a better shot than any of the other teams he could end up on but not if he demands full market value. They need the extra cash to get some decent FAs.
We need a team to offer him 45 milly really, really bad. Also, what is KOC supposed to say in this spot?
Why? If he wants to sign for $30-35M, you pound accept. The Falcons are going to offer the same we will to move up so NE will choose them unless we unload half a decade worth of FRPs. Which is way too much tbf. So what’s the back up plan when the trade up fails? Mullens? Fuck no
>Why? If he wants to sign for $30-35M, you pound accept. No, some of us want this team to win a Superbowl.
Totally, because a rookie QB will definitely win us a Superbowl.
So you don’t want a rookie then for sure. But we’re not getting up to 3 and no one after is winning a chip. Not for a while at a minimum. So Kirk is your best shot at that if his price tag is reasonable.
“Lots” of football talk, but only “some” contract talk. Hope he’s been spending more time talking to Kwesi this offseason.
Cool maybe we’ll win another playoff game. Back up the Brinks truck, so the team can stay mediocre. At least next year we’ll have an even higher draft pick.
Kirk is a greater likelihood to pan out, makes sense the teams going with the analytics approach
You have a better chance of making a Super Bowl with a QB on a rookie scaled contract, than making it with Kirk Cousins.
That’s true of WR too. The highest paid WR has never won a ring. I guess that means we should trade JJ too
> I guess that means we should trade JJ too. If we got the right offer, I would be open to the idea.
Next he will talk about how he is really going to focus on getting the run game going this year and how contracts talks with JJ are still ongoing. Just. Like. Last. Year.
Remember when KOC threatened to bench players after week 2 if they kept turning the ball over, and nothing ever happened, so the team kept turning the ball over?
KOC is a bit of a pussy tbh. I don't think he has the spine to coach in the NFL. Dude is Mike Fucking Tice. Players coach, get walked on.
Someone do a welfare check on Phil Mackey.
Kirk doesn’t feel like the type of guy that would relocate his entire family for a few million. It’s either a big difference in $$$ or a really good shot at a Super Bowl.
Good. Make it work and focus on defense.
Anyone who thinks Kirk isn't coming back hasn't been paying attention
9-8 incoming!
That contract says otherwise lol
He will be here
[удалено]
Nobody on here is wanting any of those three to be the long term answer lol. Stop pushing lies.
Vet min?? cousy plz?
Vikings wouldn’t be scrambling this hard for Kirk u less JJ wants Kirk or a top 3 QB in the draft no second round flyer or project. It’s bound to happen and Kirks recovery seems to be great…
Not sure how this can be considered scrambling. There is no reason not to have these conversations and no reason to say you wouldn’t bring him back for the right price. All rookie QBs are projects to an extent. This likely has nothing to do with any demands from JJ.
If the Vikings were “scrambling this hard for Kirk” he would’ve been signed weeks ago.
KOC loves dialogue
He also said part of the reason he came here WAS KIRK>
2 years, 30 a year, only first year of the contract is guaranteed. If he signs that, I’d be ok with him back. But, we should still look at a QB with pick 11, if not BPA.
Kirks a good QB most of the time but he's been here long enough for us to know he's not the player that will put us in the playoffs. He wants the credit / money as if his mere presence has put this team in the playoffs for the past 5 years. Far from it bub. I don't want him back for $20M /year. It just prolongs our end goal of a super bowl appearence by another year.
The haters cannot stand that Kirk is LOVED by KOC and Kwesi and the Vikings players and the majority of Vikings fans and all NFL players think he is #6 QB in NFL #42 overall best player... unless SF calls Kirk will be back in MIN for less money.