Kirk Cousins' contract is a bargain

[StumpHunter]

You said that since Oakland's pass rush was the worst in the NFL in 2018 not giving up a sack to them didn't mean anything, and I said they were much improved over last season. Considering that with 4 games to go they already have twice as many sacks as 2018, I am pretty sure I nailed it. You should probably stop using this example as some sort of win for you. It is kind of embarrassing.

What's embarrassing is your logic behind this. Last year, the Raiders had 13 sacks on the year. THIRTEEN! It was the lowest sack total by a team in almost 40 years. The 2nd worst sack total last year was the Giants and Patriots tied at 30 which was more than double what the Raiders had. THAT's how large of a gap there was. Do you realize just how hard that is to pull off? So to say THEY were much improved, is like saying the Lions were much improved following an 0-16 season. Well, yeah, ya cant really get any worse than that! So was anyone going to say "Yeah the Vikings beat up on the Lions in '09 and they were a much improved team following that 0-16 season"?? Uh nope, they might have improved some, but they still arent very good at all.

Insert: Oaklands pass rush. They are ranked 22nd in the NFL this year in sacks. That's still well below average. So maybe they were improved this year but they are still NOT GOOD. So to try and use a weak argument like saying our OL held up well against Oaklands pass rush, carries zero weight. Literally zero. So I'm not sure what you think you "nailed" other than multiplying 13 sacks x 2 and saying they doubled their numbers from last year. But again, they are still a well below average pass rushing team. Just because a boy grows some balls, doesnt make him a man yet.

Giving up 0 sacks to a team that is averaging more than 2 a game doesn't hold "zero weight". Giving up 0 sacks to a team that averages less than 1 a game probably does. See the distinction? Of course you don't.

It is all moot though, since we now have a larger sample size and the Vikings Oline is 13th in sack percentage, 7th in QB hits given up and has given their QB the longest time to throw in the NFL. They aren't elite, but they certainly aren't 25th in pass blocking. They are right in the middle among Olines. Good enough to win with, but probably not good enough that you won't use them as an excuse for the next time Cousins struggles. I am not sure there is a line good enough for that though.

[StumpHunter]

Not sure why you’re bringing up anything to do with this OL run blocking. I said that’s where the giant improvement was in the original post. I said the PASS blocking is still the problem. But I’m glad you went to google and tried to find one pass blocking stat they were good in so you could use it in your argument. The main reason sacks are down from last year is because they are getting him outside the pocket and not sitting directly behind a bunch of trash cans like flip did. Have you seen cousins numbers outside the pocket?! They are insane.

But either way, I don’t know how many times I have to prove your “time to throw” stat faulty for you to stop bringing it up in 95% of your cousins arguments. He’s playing like a top QB in this league right now stump, it’s ok for you to admit that. He’s outplaying his contract right now. It’s ok for you to admit that. But instead you have to sit here and continue to fight it. Just stop. You’re wasting your time.

If you think our OL is good and constantly defend Xavier Rhodes, all I can say is I’m glad you aren’t our GM. You defend this OL and Rhodes but it pains you to say Cousins is a good quarterback and playing like a top QB? Given how this season is going....that absolutely baffles me and it shows me that you really don’t know what you’re talking about. Maybe I’ve been the one wasting my time arguing with you

Not only that, PHP, but the O-line hasn't even been that good at run blocking lately.

We've had less than 100 yards rushing three of the past four games, which is a big reason we're only 2-2 over that stretch.

One big factor in BOTH the passing and running games is Adam Thielen. With him being out, not only does it give Cousins fewer targets, but it allows defenses to put more guys in the box, which hurts the running game. Yet Cousins has still produced.

What kind of numbers might this offense have if Thielen had been healthy? They were turning into a juggernaut by the Detroit game. It's been much more of a struggle since. Cousins is now on the fringes of the MVP conversation, if he's in it at all. With Thielen, I believe it would have been between Jackson, Wilson and Cousins. That's how well our guy was playing, and he's still playing pretty darned well.

I could have sworn I just read someone with your moniker rip PFF a new one on here just the other day while defending Kline.

I must be mistaken.

[J. Kapp 11]

Not only that, PHP, but the O-line hasn't even been that good at run blocking lately.

We've had less than 100 yards rushing three of the past four games, which is a big reason we're only 2-2 over that stretch.

One big factor in BOTH the passing and running games is Adam Thielen. With him being out, not only does it give Cousins fewer targets, but it allows defenses to put more guys in the box, which hurts the running game. Yet Cousins has still produced.

What kind of numbers might this offense have if Thielen had been healthy? They were turning into a juggernaut by the Detroit game. It's been much more of a struggle since. Cousins is now on the fringes of the MVP conversation, if he's in it at all. With Thielen, I believe it would have been between Jackson, Wilson and Cousins. That's how well our guy was playing, and he's still playing pretty darned well.

I could have sworn I just read someone with your moniker rip PFF a new one on here just the other day while defending Kline.

I must be mistaken.

What the heck do my comments about Adam Thielen have to do with the fact that Vikings players and coaches respect Josh Kline? And how does PFF factor into my comments at all?

This is commonly known as a reach, a tactic people use when they lose factual arguments over and over. I'd say I respect the attempt, but, well, I don't.

[Pondering Her Percy]

What's embarrassing is your logic behind this. Last year, the Raiders had 13 sacks on the year. THIRTEEN! It was the lowest sack total by a team in almost 40 years. The 2nd worst sack total last year was the Giants and Patriots tied at 30 which was more than double what the Raiders had. THAT's how large of a gap there was. Do you realize just how hard that is to pull off? So to say THEY were much improved, is like saying the Lions were much improved following an 0-16 season. Well, yeah, ya cant really get any worse than that! So was anyone going to say "Yeah the Vikings beat up on the Lions in '09 and they were a much improved team following that 0-16 season"?? Uh nope, they might have improved some, but they still arent very good at all.

Insert: Oaklands pass rush. They are ranked 22nd in the NFL this year in sacks. That's still well below average. So maybe they were improved this year but they are still NOT GOOD. So to try and use a weak argument like saying our OL held up well against Oaklands pass rush, carries zero weight. Literally zero. So I'm not sure what you think you "nailed" other than multiplying 13 sacks x 2 and saying they doubled their numbers from last year. But again, they are still a well below average pass rushing team. Just because a boy grows some balls, doesnt make him a man yet.

Giving up 0 sacks to a team that is averaging more than 2 a game doesn't hold "zero weight". Giving up 0 sacks to a team that averages less than 1 a game probably does. See the distinction? Of course you don't.

It is all moot though, since we now have a larger sample size and the Vikings Oline is 13th in sack percentage, 7th in QB hits given up and has given their QB the longest time to throw in the NFL. They aren't elite, but they certainly aren't 25th in pass blocking. They are right in the middle among Olines. Good enough to win with, but probably not good enough that you won't use them as an excuse for the next time Cousins struggles. I am not sure there is a line good enough for that though.

Dude just stop. Who uses the raiders pass rush to defend an OL? And clearly you didn’t read what I posted about PFF. They look at every single play. Not just a stat sheet.

But what’s your excuse with Denver giving up 5 sacks? Or the giants when they gave up 3 sacks? Denver has 1 more sack than Oakland and the giants has 1 less than Oakland. There are two below average pass rushes that this OL collapsed against. Heck the bears only have 3 more than Oakland and 6 of them were against us. The best pass rush we’ve faced from a sack standpoint is Washington who is ranking 9th. We haven’t even faced a top sack team this season. And they’ve had some really bad games. But let’s go blame cousins and defend this trash can of a pass blocking OL.

I’m done arguing with you. You’re a cousins hater that refuses to admit you are wrong when you’ve been proved wrong so many times it’s not even funny.

[StumpHunter]

Not only that, PHP, but the O-line hasn't even been that good at run blocking lately.

We've had less than 100 yards rushing three of the past four games, which is a big reason we're only 2-2 over that stretch.

One big factor in BOTH the passing and running games is Adam Thielen. With him being out, not only does it give Cousins fewer targets, but it allows defenses to put more guys in the box, which hurts the running game. Yet Cousins has still produced.

What kind of numbers might this offense have if Thielen had been healthy? They were turning into a juggernaut by the Detroit game. It's been much more of a struggle since. Cousins is now on the fringes of the MVP conversation, if he's in it at all. With Thielen, I believe it would have been between Jackson, Wilson and Cousins. That's how well our guy was playing, and he's still playing pretty darned well.

I could have sworn I just read someone with your moniker rip PFF a new one on here just the other day while defending Kline.

I must be mistaken.

I could have sworn I just read someone with your moniker rip PFF a new one on here just the other day while defending Kline.

I must be mistaken.

What the heck do my comments about Adam Thielen have to do with the fact that Vikings players and coaches respect Josh Kline? And how does PFF factor into my comments at all?

This is commonly known as a reach, a tactic people use when they lose factual arguments over and over. I'd say I respect the attempt, but, well, I don't.

No reach. You are agreeing with a line of thought that is based solely on a PFF grade after going on a tirade against PFF just a week ago.


I just found it odd.

[StumpHunter]

Giving up 0 sacks to a team that is averaging more than 2 a game doesn't hold "zero weight". Giving up 0 sacks to a team that averages less than 1 a game probably does. See the distinction? Of course you don't.

It is all moot though, since we now have a larger sample size and the Vikings Oline is 13th in sack percentage, 7th in QB hits given up and has given their QB the longest time to throw in the NFL. They aren't elite, but they certainly aren't 25th in pass blocking. They are right in the middle among Olines. Good enough to win with, but probably not good enough that you won't use them as an excuse for the next time Cousins struggles. I am not sure there is a line good enough for that though.

Dude just stop. Who uses the raiders pass rush to defend an OL? And clearly you didn’t read what I posted about PFF. They look at every single play. Not just a stat sheet.

But what’s your excuse with Denver giving up 5 sacks? Or the giants when they gave up 3 sacks? Denver has 1 more sack than Oakland and the giants has 1 less than Oakland. There are two below average pass rushes that this OL collapsed against. Heck the bears only have 3 more than Oakland and 6 of them were against us. The best pass rush we’ve faced from a sack standpoint is Washington who is ranking 9th. We haven’t even faced a top sack team this season. And they’ve had some really bad games. But let’s go blame cousins and defend this trash can of a pass blocking OL.

I’m done arguing with you. You’re a cousins hater that refuses to admit you are wrong when you’ve been proved wrong so many times it’s not even funny.

I am not using the Oakland pass rush to defend the Oline. I am using the actual stats accrued during the season that prove they are at worst an average oline.

The line has given up one more sack than the Saints, 5 fewer than the Packers line. How does a dumpster of an oline do that while their QB holds the ball longer than any other QB this season?

[Pondering Her Percy]

Dude just stop. Who uses the raiders pass rush to defend an OL? And clearly you didn’t read what I posted about PFF. They look at every single play. Not just a stat sheet.

But what’s your excuse with Denver giving up 5 sacks? Or the giants when they gave up 3 sacks? Denver has 1 more sack than Oakland and the giants has 1 less than Oakland. There are two below average pass rushes that this OL collapsed against. Heck the bears only have 3 more than Oakland and 6 of them were against us. The best pass rush we’ve faced from a sack standpoint is Washington who is ranking 9th. We haven’t even faced a top sack team this season. And they’ve had some really bad games. But let’s go blame cousins and defend this trash can of a pass blocking OL.

I’m done arguing with you. You’re a cousins hater that refuses to admit you are wrong when you’ve been proved wrong so many times it’s not even funny.

I am not using the Oakland pass rush to defend the Oline. I am using the actual stats accrued during the season that prove they are at worst an average oline.

The line has given up one more sack than the Saints, 5 fewer than the Packers line. How does a dumpster of an oline do that while their QB holds the ball longer than any other QB this season?

You did use Oakland’s pass rush to defend this OL a few weeks after the Oakland game. It wasn’t something you just brought up but good try. You are now the only guy on here that defends this OLs pass blocking.

And there you go again...the whole “holding the ball too long” bull crap. I find it funny that I haven’t seen a soul on here support you when it comes to that stat. Same goes for the OLs pass blocking.

And I’m starting to think that your goal everyday when you come on here is to just push buttons and try to pis# people off. You’re already on your way with Kapp, you and I have gone at it for how long now, bow hunting Viking has called you out before, and there have been quite a few more. You’re gonna end up getting yourself banned if you aren’t careful. It’s nearly impossible for this board (or any board for that matter) to not have a negative hater that, more often than not, logs on to troll, annoy and tick people off. First it was Demi, then purple koolaid, then jordysghost and now you. So congrats, you are now that guy on VMB. It’s a tall order but you’ve definitely gotten there. And I will say, I know there are quite a few out there that would agree with me.

[fiestavike]

The Vikings have had TERRIBLE pass blocking for a while. They got some improvement with Reiff and Remmers, but then moved Remmers inside and fell off a cliff again. This year is the best pass blocking the Vikings have had for many a year, and that may be faint praise, but as a fan, I've been encouraged by the OL this year.

[Pondering Her Percy]

The Vikings have had TERRIBLE pass blocking for a while. They got some improvement with Reiff and Remmers, but then moved Remmers inside and fell off a cliff again. This year is the best pass blocking the Vikings have had for many a year, and that may be faint praise, but as a fan, I've been encouraged by the OL this year.

The difference is the coordinator, not the players. Kubiak and stefanski are doing exactly what shurmur did. They have found ways to hide the poor pass blocking of this OL. Think about it, our OL in 2017 and in 2019 are showing “similar stats”. Compared to 2016 and 2018. Who were the great players on the 2017 and 2019 OL? O’Neill this year for sure. Outside of that who?? Nobody. They are all fairly average to below average to some very bad offensive lineman.

What was the difference between the 2017, 2018 and 2019 offensive lines?? Because 2018 was downright terrible. And how much really changed player wise each of those years? Its because of the coordinator. There are ways to make this OL looks average, never great but average and that’s on the coordinator. In 2017 and 2019, we’ve had coordinators that coach to their players strengths. In 2018, you had a coach that wanted to do what he was taught, didn’t adjust, refused to run, etc and it led to him getting fired.

This is why I’ve said from day 1 that the biggest difference last year was not cousins. It was the OC. Nobody was succeeding with flip last year. He got another OC job and has been terrible there too.

I don’t think we have downright terrible offensive lineman. O’Neill is legit, Elflein is bad and the rest are in between. I’m not “encouraged” by this OL. I’m encouraged by O’Neill 100%. Willing to give Bradbury time. Ready to give up on Elflein, ready to give up on Reiff. And Kline is more of a stop gap than anything. We need a future LT which is tough to find even though I think it should be O’Neill and we need a LG. Our left side is pretty brutal right now. Which is not the side you want weaknesses at given it’s the QBs blind side

[StumpHunter]

The Vikings have had TERRIBLE pass blocking for a while. They got some improvement with Reiff and Remmers, but then moved Remmers inside and fell off a cliff again. This year is the best pass blocking the Vikings have had for many a year, and that may be faint praise, but as a fan, I've been encouraged by the OL this year.

The difference is the coordinator, not the players. Kubiak and stefanski are doing exactly what shurmur did. They have found ways to hide the poor pass blocking of this OL. Think about it, our OL in 2017 and in 2019 are showing “similar stats”. Compared to 2016 and 2018. Who were the great players on the 2017 and 2019 OL? O’Neill this year for sure. Outside of that who?? Nobody. They are all fairly average to below average to some very bad offensive lineman.

What was the difference between the 2017, 2018 and 2019 offensive lines?? Because 2018 was downright terrible. And how much really changed player wise each of those years? Its because of the coordinator. There are ways to make this OL looks average, never great but average and that’s on the coordinator. In 2017 and 2019, we’ve had coordinators that coach to their players strengths. In 2018, you had a coach that wanted to do what he was taught, didn’t adjust, refused to run, etc and it led to him getting fired.

This is why I’ve said from day 1 that the biggest difference last year was not cousins. It was the OC. Nobody was succeeding with flip last year. He got another OC job and has been terrible there too.

I don’t think we have downright terrible offensive lineman. O’Neill is legit, Elflein is bad and the rest are in between. I’m not “encouraged” by this OL. I’m encouraged by O’Neill 100%. Willing to give Bradbury time. Ready to give up on Elflein, ready to give up on Reiff. And Kline is more of a stop gap than anything. We need a future LT which is tough to find even though I think it should be O’Neill and we need a LG. Our left side is pretty brutal right now. Which is not the side you want weaknesses at given it’s the QBs blind side

I agree that the talent isn't great on the line. Elf is terrible, Bradbury is improving but still a rookie and Kline is turning out to be the below average vet I thought he was when we signed him in FA. As a unit they are keeping their QB upright though, and that is all that matters. At least until it is time to figure out who to keep, extend or cut.

PFF says there is no significant difference between Oneil and Reiff btw. Elf is supposedly our 3rd best lineman and playing at an above average level. Bradbury and Kline are the biggest reason the PFF average grade for the line is so low. Bradbury is supposedly a bottom 4 center.

[StanM]

I agree. At one time Kirk had the most lucrative quarterback's contract in football the key words being at one time. I'm not sure how many have exceeded that amount but I'm certain there are several by now. The thing is that Kirk is a good QB who I think still can improve in spite of how well he has been playing. Really, who else would be available and would it make sense to bet what remains of our team these next couple of years on an unproven rookie now matter their performance in college: I have a feeling that if the Vikings decide to stay with Cousins, which I can't see why not, that his familiarity with the Twin Cities and the organization will motivate him to compromise on a next contract if it's in Minnesota. Kirk is a Midwest guy and a good fit here in Minnesota.

[Cliff]

Kirk has been doing enough to change my mind for sure. I'm still not sure how he might look in the playoffs but he definitely seems worth the contract considering we'd have to pay some QB. He's making good passes and smart decisions. Has led a significant comeback. In a way I think Thielen being out a few games might be a blessing in disguise. It's forced Kirk to seek out new targets and him building chemistry with Rudolph in particular has been very important.

Re: Opportunity cost. In my opinion the biggest loss was not drafting Lamar Jackson instead who would be on a rookie salary. That's not Kirk's fault, of course. If we could turn back time I would have loved to see them keep Keenum as a further stopgap and draft Jackson.

[The negotiator]

Kirk has been doing enough to change my mind for sure. I'm still not sure how he might look in the playoffs but he definitely seems worth the contract considering we'd have to pay some QB. He's making good passes and smart decisions. Has led a significant comeback. In a way I think Thielen being out a few games might be a blessing in disguise. It's forced Kirk to seek out new targets and him building chemistry with Rudolph in particular has been very important.

Re: Opportunity cost. In my opinion the biggest loss was not drafting Lamar Jackson instead who would be on a rookie salary. That's not Kirk's fault, of course. If we could turn back time I would have loved to see them keep Keenum as a further stopgap and draft Jackson.

It would be intriguing to speculate if Jackson would have ever flourished in Zimmer’s structure. Going forward it will be interesting to see next year how teams figure out how to stop him. Most important is how long does any running QB like Jackson stay healthy.
Wilson is a smart mobile qb who knows how to get down and avoid big hits. Not sure that Jackson understands the risks at this point. Time will tell. He’s fun to watch.

[J. Kapp 11]

Kirk has been doing enough to change my mind for sure. I'm still not sure how he might look in the playoffs but he definitely seems worth the contract considering we'd have to pay some QB. He's making good passes and smart decisions. Has led a significant comeback. In a way I think Thielen being out a few games might be a blessing in disguise. It's forced Kirk to seek out new targets and him building chemistry with Rudolph in particular has been very important.

Re: Opportunity cost. In my opinion the biggest loss was not drafting Lamar Jackson instead who would be on a rookie salary. That's not Kirk's fault, of course. If we could turn back time I would have loved to see them keep Keenum as a further stopgap and draft Jackson.

It would be intriguing to speculate if Jackson would have ever flourished in Zimmer’s structure. Going forward it will be interesting to see next year how teams figure out how to stop him. Most important is how long does any running QB like Jackson stay healthy.
Wilson is a smart mobile qb who knows how to get down and avoid big hits. Not sure that Jackson understands the risks at this point. Time will tell. He’s fun to watch.

To take your point further ...

If Jackson's play nets them a Lombardi Trophy AND he gets hurt down the road, will teams begin looking at QBs as 6-year investments rather than 10-15 year investments?

[Fat Stupid Loser]

Kirk has been doing enough to change my mind for sure. I'm still not sure how he might look in the playoffs but he definitely seems worth the contract considering we'd have to pay some QB. He's making good passes and smart decisions. Has led a significant comeback. In a way I think Thielen being out a few games might be a blessing in disguise. It's forced Kirk to seek out new targets and him building chemistry with Rudolph in particular has been very important.

Re: Opportunity cost. In my opinion the biggest loss was not drafting Lamar Jackson instead who would be on a rookie salary. That's not Kirk's fault, of course. If we could turn back time I would have loved to see them keep Keenum as a further stopgap and draft Jackson.

It would be intriguing to speculate if Jackson would have ever flourished in Zimmer’s structure. Going forward it will be interesting to see next year how teams figure out how to stop him. Most important is how long does any running QB like Jackson stay healthy.
Wilson is a smart mobile qb who knows how to get down and avoid big hits. Not sure that Jackson understands the risks at this point. Time will tell. He’s fun to watch.

Defenses will adjust next year and learn to limit what he is doing. We watched that happen a while back, eh? The difference between Jackson and Bob is that Jackson is a runner. Bob wasn't, he was just fast.