Looks like Griff is gone

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

Fat Stupid Loser
Backup
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 7:36 am
x 23

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by Fat Stupid Loser » Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:02 am

VikingsVictorious wrote:
Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:22 pm
S197 wrote:
Sat Mar 21, 2020 3:43 pm
The "all in" move was when Cousins was first picked up. At that point, most of the pieces were in place, the window was open and it appeared like the Vikings were a QB and a few smaller pieces (guard) away. Cousins contract was essentially a time bomb. It was going to blow the team apart but the hope was the fuse was long enough to get the team a championship before that happened. Now, some refused to believe it. Brez is a master at manipulating the cap! The Vikings are a dream destination for free agents! The players have bought in and believe in Zimmer!

Well, now it turns out you actually do have to pay the piper eventually, Brez or not. The team is in cap hell. Those free agents that would play for pennies because we're a contender aren't showing up. And it turns out a lot of the smoke was actually fire and there were at least a few that weren't content with Zimmer, maybe more than a few.

Facing our new reality, where about half of the defensive starters are gone, we're in the bottom half of cap space, and arguably the biggest weapon on offense has left (argue if you want, but teams weren't doubling Thielen), what does giving Cousins two more years do? Somehow he'll be better without Diggs? Somehow our OL is going to be better with Oli Udoh and Dru Samia?
Cousins is a guy that plays to the level of talent around him, he's not a guy that elevates talent. Our talent pool got a whole lot smaller but somehow we magically get better?

That's where the fence sitting comes into play for me. We are in full rebuild mode. We jettisoned our vets and are putting our eggs in draft picks. Even if we absolutely crush the draft, it's still a year or two before they make any sort of meaningful contribution. Rhodes, Waynes, and Alexander all took a while to get going, it's really rare to hit the ground running in the NFL.

Does anyone believe we're even going to entertain a QB as a potential heir in say the first 5 rounds? After extending Mannion? Because John David Booty was drafted 13 years ago? We know Rick's MO and it's this disjointed way of approaching the team. Trade down for 10+ picks to bring in a lot of competition, except at QB, where there can never be any.

What does Cousins contract cost us next year? Probably Cook. Maybe Harris depending on how that shakes out. Ifeadi if he has the breakout year some are predicting. The number of "hits" Rick needs in the draft keeps going up the longer he hitches himself to Cousins and his boat anchor contract.
Great post unitl the final three words. His contract is just what decent QBs get these days so it can't be considered an anchor IMO.
This is always my question. What do fans want? We all want Brady for 15 M a year. I get it, but c'mon. Kirk's contract is the norm now. Any team with a better than average QB is paying this. Its what a good QB costs. Stupid as it is. Barring a market correction on QB salaries, it is what it is. The only alternative is to go get a Fitz and spend your money on overpaid LBs. Somebody is getting overpaid to win a SB. And all that money spent to build a "team" will get blown up come new contract time. Who gets paid that money doesn't matter. Whoever gets the money handcuffs the team and wrecks the cap. We can get the CB and WR to replace Diggs with that QB money, but then we have Fitzmagic throwing to him. Right or wrong the prevailing belief is you need a really good QB to be seriously competitive year after year. The butt squinching over Kirk's or Crapoplo's contracts is pointless. Good luck landing a QB better than Kirk AND paying him less, unless the plan is to find a great rookie every 5 years. Doesn't mean you don't always look to upgrade but when you have one as good as Kirk, you lock him up.
1 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38140
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 310

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by Mothman » Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:11 am

Fat Stupid Loser wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:02 am
VikingsVictorious wrote:
Sat Mar 21, 2020 6:22 pm

Great post unitl the final three words. His contract is just what decent QBs get these days so it can't be considered an anchor IMO.
This is always my question. What do fans want? We all want Brady for 15 M a year. I get it, but c'mon. Kirk's contract is the norm now. Any team with a better than average QB is paying this. Its what a good QB costs. Stupid as it is. Barring a market correction on QB salaries, it is what it is. The only alternative is to go get a Fitz and spend your money on overpaid LBs. Somebody is getting overpaid to win a SB. And all that money spent to build a "team" will get blown up come new contract time. Who gets paid that money doesn't matter. Whoever gets the money handcuffs the team and wrecks the cap. We can get the CB and WR to replace Diggs with that QB money, but then we have Fitzmagic throwing to him. Right or wrong the prevailing belief is you need a really good QB to be seriously competitive year after year. The butt squinching over Kirk's or Crapoplo's contracts is pointless. Good luck landing a QB better than Kirk AND paying him less, unless the plan is to find a great rookie every 5 years. Doesn't mean you don't always look to upgrade but when you have one as good as Kirk, you lock him up.
What do fans want? Ideally, get that rookie and if he turns out to be an elite QB, pay him like one later. Paying Cousins like an elite quarterback doesn't make him one and although I understand the market forces at work, if the team is going to pay big money for a player with his resumé, strengths and limitations, I think it makes sense to do so in a way that doesn't hamstring the team and reduce their options too much. Load the contract with incentives instead of guaranteeing so much of it.

More importantly, as with everything, be logical about it. If the team philosophy is to place an emphasis on Zimmer's defense, have the 4th most rushing attempts in the league and be 30th in pass attempts (their 2019 rankings), is investing $28+ million in Cousins necessary? Is it wise? If you're going to make a huge investment in a quarterback, prioritize pass protection and provide him with plenty of quality weapons. Protect that investment and maximize his ability to contribute.

Quarterback is clearly the most important position in football so theoretically, it's fine for the Vikings to pay so much for the position but with that investment, you want a genuine difference-maker and you need him to make a big difference.
0 x

Fat Stupid Loser
Backup
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 7:36 am
x 23

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by Fat Stupid Loser » Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:31 am

Mothman wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:11 am
Fat Stupid Loser wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:02 am

This is always my question. What do fans want? We all want Brady for 15 M a year. I get it, but c'mon. Kirk's contract is the norm now. Any team with a better than average QB is paying this. Its what a good QB costs. Stupid as it is. Barring a market correction on QB salaries, it is what it is. The only alternative is to go get a Fitz and spend your money on overpaid LBs. Somebody is getting overpaid to win a SB. And all that money spent to build a "team" will get blown up come new contract time. Who gets paid that money doesn't matter. Whoever gets the money handcuffs the team and wrecks the cap. We can get the CB and WR to replace Diggs with that QB money, but then we have Fitzmagic throwing to him. Right or wrong the prevailing belief is you need a really good QB to be seriously competitive year after year. The butt squinching over Kirk's or Crapoplo's contracts is pointless. Good luck landing a QB better than Kirk AND paying him less, unless the plan is to find a great rookie every 5 years. Doesn't mean you don't always look to upgrade but when you have one as good as Kirk, you lock him up.
What do fans want? Ideally, get that rookie and if he turns out to be an elite QB, pay him like one later. Paying Cousins like an elite quarterback doesn't make him one and although I understand the market forces at work, if the team is going to pay big money for a player with his resumé, strengths and limitations, I think it makes sense to do so in a way that doesn't hamstring the team and reduce their options too much. Load the contract with incentives instead of guaranteeing so much of it.

More importantly, as with everything, be logical about it. If the team philosophy is to place an emphasis on Zimmer's defense, have the 4th most rushing attempts in the league and be 30th in pass attempts (their 2019 rankings), is investing $28+ million in Cousins necessary? Is it wise? If you're going to make a huge investment in a quarterback, prioritize pass protection and provide him with plenty of quality weapons. Protect that investment and maximize his ability to contribute.

Quarterback is clearly the most important position in football so theoretically, it's fine for the Vikings to pay so much for the position but with that investment, you want a genuine difference-maker and you need him to make a big difference.
You are describing the perfect scenario. I agree. Odds of achieving the perfect scenario--- 0% or really close to that? As you mention, market forces are at work. Hard to see how they could do better than they are without lucking in to the next Mahomes or totally switching gears to the get a guy at QB and building a historic D. And by lucking in to the next Mahomes I mean the astronomical alignment of circumstances that are required to actually be in position to get him, if he is even out there for the next 6 years.
1 x

StumpHunter
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1675
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 210

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by StumpHunter » Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:42 am

Fat Stupid Loser wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:31 am
Mothman wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:11 am


What do fans want? Ideally, get that rookie and if he turns out to be an elite QB, pay him like one later. Paying Cousins like an elite quarterback doesn't make him one and although I understand the market forces at work, if the team is going to pay big money for a player with his resumé, strengths and limitations, I think it makes sense to do so in a way that doesn't hamstring the team and reduce their options too much. Load the contract with incentives instead of guaranteeing so much of it.

More importantly, as with everything, be logical about it. If the team philosophy is to place an emphasis on Zimmer's defense, have the 4th most rushing attempts in the league and be 30th in pass attempts (their 2019 rankings), is investing $28+ million in Cousins necessary? Is it wise? If you're going to make a huge investment in a quarterback, prioritize pass protection and provide him with plenty of quality weapons. Protect that investment and maximize his ability to contribute.

Quarterback is clearly the most important position in football so theoretically, it's fine for the Vikings to pay so much for the position but with that investment, you want a genuine difference-maker and you need him to make a big difference.
You are describing the perfect scenario. I agree. Odds of achieving the perfect scenario--- 0% or really close to that? As you mention, market forces are at work. Hard to see how they could do better than they are without lucking in to the next Mahomes or totally switching gears to the get a guy at QB and building a historic D. And by lucking in to the next Mahomes I mean the astronomical alignment of circumstances that are required to actually be in position to get him, if he is even out there for the next 6 years.
KC didn't get Mahomes through luck. They had the 27th pick in the draft, had a decent starter already, and identified Mahomes as being a guy they could build around. Luck implies little control over who a team drafts, when in reality, some teams are good at identifying great QBs, while others do not. KC was not more lucky than the Bears in that draft, they were better at identifying a great QB than the Bears.

Stop with this luck garbage. NO, GB, KC, and Seattle have elite QBs because they were better than anyone else at identifying them in the draft or FAs. They didn't pass on signing Brees because they were scared of the injury, they didn't pass on drafting Rodgers because they already had Favre, they didn't settle for mediocrity in Alex Smith when Mahomes was available to trade up and get him, and they didn't pass on Wilson when they had spent big in FAs to get their guy.

We were scared of that injury with Brees, felt DC was good enough, went with Bradford instead of saving our pick in 2017, and passed on Wilson because we already had Ponder.

That is why we are forced to over pay Cousins. Not because of luck, but because of poor decisions.
2 x

Fat Stupid Loser
Backup
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 7:36 am
x 23

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by Fat Stupid Loser » Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:06 am

StumpHunter wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:42 am
Fat Stupid Loser wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:31 am

You are describing the perfect scenario. I agree. Odds of achieving the perfect scenario--- 0% or really close to that? As you mention, market forces are at work. Hard to see how they could do better than they are without lucking in to the next Mahomes or totally switching gears to the get a guy at QB and building a historic D. And by lucking in to the next Mahomes I mean the astronomical alignment of circumstances that are required to actually be in position to get him, if he is even out there for the next 6 years.
KC didn't get Mahomes through luck. They had the 27th pick in the draft, had a decent starter already, and identified Mahomes as being a guy they could build around. Luck implies little control over who a team drafts, when in reality, some teams are good at identifying great QBs, while others do not. KC was not more lucky than the Bears in that draft, they were better at identifying a great QB than the Bears.

Stop with this luck garbage. NO, GB, KC, and Seattle have elite QBs because they were better than anyone else at identifying them in the draft or FAs. They didn't pass on signing Brees because they were scared of the injury, they didn't pass on drafting Rodgers because they already had Favre, they didn't settle for mediocrity in Alex Smith when Mahomes was available to trade up and get him, and they didn't pass on Wilson when they had spent big in FAs to get their guy.

We were scared of that injury with Brees, felt DC was good enough, went with Bradford instead of saving our pick in 2017, and passed on Wilson because we already had Ponder.

That is why we are forced to over pay Cousins. Not because of luck, but because of poor decisions.
Ok, I agree some are better than others at identifying talent. There is still a ton of luck in how each draft scenario lines up and whether 1 out of 32 teams are in a position to take the risk of shooting for a Mahomes when maybe 6 other teams want him. And whether their opinion of a guy like Mahomes being that good is actually correct. Mahomes may have busted like so many that have been reached for did. Reid got it right this time. Green Bay got it right once 17 years ago. A crap NO team took a shot on an injured QB and got it right umpteen years ago. Not going to give you Seattle. Wilson is a quality QB, not elite.

Poor decisions are clearer in hindsight. There are too many variables in a league of parity that are not controllable to take the stance that if we just had competent decision makers like everyone else obviously have, we would have our QB who is worth the money.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38140
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 310

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by Mothman » Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:11 am

Fat Stupid Loser wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:31 am
You are describing the perfect scenario. I agree. Odds of achieving the perfect scenario--- 0% or really close to that? As you mention, market forces are at work. Hard to see how they could do better than they are without lucking in to the next Mahomes or totally switching gears to the get a guy at QB and building a historic D. And by lucking in to the next Mahomes I mean the astronomical alignment of circumstances that are required to actually be in position to get him, if he is even out there for the next 6 years.
I'm talking about logical team-building, not just a perfect scenario. Obviously, finding a terrific QB in the draft is ideal and it's not just a question of luck. Luck plays a role but it doesn't take an astronomical alignment of circumstances. It requires scouting, preparation and enough vision to recognize the right fit for a team. They should always be on the lookout for that young QB and ready to seize the opportunity and draft him. However...

If Cousins is their guy and they're willing to invest 4 or 5 years and a fortune into him, they should have very good reasons for that decision and make the most of their investment. Why is a team that has long emphasized defense and wants to control the game with the run investing so heavily in a veteran QB without much history of postseason success? Are they winning more games and going deeper into the playoffs with Cousins than they would have with a less expensive option and more investment in other positions? It's fine that they've invested in him but at this point, if this is the direction they're going, build the OL into a dominant unit, build up the WR corps (which was thin even with Diggs) and make the most of it. Find out if he can guide the team to a Super Bowl with a great offensive unit around him. Do what's necessary to enable him to thrive. Otherwise, it's hard to see how it makes more sense to pay him this much when they could have a younger player handing off to Cook and Mattison and greater cap flexibility to improve the team.
1 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38140
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 310

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by Mothman » Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:20 am

Fat Stupid Loser wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:06 am
Ok, I agree some are better than others at identifying talent. There is still a ton of luck in how each draft scenario lines up and whether 1 out of 32 teams are in a position to take the risk of shooting for a Mahomes when maybe 6 other teams want him. And whether their opinion of a guy like Mahomes being that good is actually correct. Mahomes may have busted like so many that have been reached for did. Reid got it right this time.
Reid got it right but that's also because Reid knew what kind of QB he wanted, what offense he was running, etc. He knew what he was looking for. Compare that to the Vikings in 2014 hiring Mike Zimmer, making Norv Turner the OC and the drafting Bridgewater who, like him or not, was a poor fit for the offensive system they wanted to run.
Green Bay got it right once 17 years ago. A crap NO team took a shot on an injured QB and got it right umpteen years ago. Not going to give you Seattle. Wilson is a quality QB, not elite.
It doesn't matter if he's elite, he's been a great fit. He's another good example of getting it right.

Spielman's approach to the QB position seems to be "Whoa! We need a QB! Who can I get right now? Price is no object! I've got a first round pick and a pile o' money right here." :tongue:
3 x

User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Pro Bowl Elite Player
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 138

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by VikingsVictorious » Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:28 am

StumpHunter wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:42 am
Fat Stupid Loser wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:31 am

You are describing the perfect scenario. I agree. Odds of achieving the perfect scenario--- 0% or really close to that? As you mention, market forces are at work. Hard to see how they could do better than they are without lucking in to the next Mahomes or totally switching gears to the get a guy at QB and building a historic D. And by lucking in to the next Mahomes I mean the astronomical alignment of circumstances that are required to actually be in position to get him, if he is even out there for the next 6 years.
KC didn't get Mahomes through luck. They had the 27th pick in the draft, had a decent starter already, and identified Mahomes as being a guy they could build around. Luck implies little control over who a team drafts, when in reality, some teams are good at identifying great QBs, while others do not. KC was not more lucky than the Bears in that draft, they were better at identifying a great QB than the Bears.

Stop with this luck garbage. NO, GB, KC, and Seattle have elite QBs because they were better than anyone else at identifying them in the draft or FAs. They didn't pass on signing Brees because they were scared of the injury, they didn't pass on drafting Rodgers because they already had Favre, they didn't settle for mediocrity in Alex Smith when Mahomes was available to trade up and get him, and they didn't pass on Wilson when they had spent big in FAs to get their guy.

We were scared of that injury with Brees, felt DC was good enough, went with Bradford instead of saving our pick in 2017, and passed on Wilson because we already had Ponder.

That is why we are forced to over pay Cousins. Not because of luck, but because of poor decisions.
Not overpaying Cousins one red cent. That is the price of a good NFL QB in today's game.
As for DC he was a talented QB and could have accomplished great things if not for injury.
You are correct that credit should be given to the teams that get the great players, but there is still a luck factor involved. The Patriots drafted Brady in the 6th round. They were smarter than the teams that didn't. However, if they knew he would turn out to be one of if not the greatest QB of all time they would not have risked waiting until the 6th round.
1 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38140
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 310

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by Mothman » Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:37 am

VikingsVictorious wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:28 am
Not overpaying Cousins one red cent. That is the price of a good NFL QB in today's game.
People keep saying this as if it ends the conversation but Cousins has the 5th highest average salary per year among NFL QBs so he's not just getting the going rate for QBs, he's getting the top rate. The 4 QBs ahead of him have all been to the Super Bowl and 3 of them have won it. Paying that kind of price isn't the only way to address the position but since it's the way the Vikes have chosen, it needs to be justified.

Again: the bottom line shouldn't be what the market price is anyway. It should be whether he's actually worth the investment.
3 x

Fat Stupid Loser
Backup
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2018 7:36 am
x 23

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by Fat Stupid Loser » Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:05 pm

Mothman wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:37 am
VikingsVictorious wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:28 am
Not overpaying Cousins one red cent. That is the price of a good NFL QB in today's game.


Again: the bottom line shouldn't be what the market price is anyway. It should be whether he's actually worth the investment.
He is playing at the level of those QBs. Lack of a SB yet doesn't change his worth (for me), when considering how few SBs the elite have produced over long careers. I'd pay him that and throw in an Escalade and lip fillers for his wife. :lol:
1 x

User avatar
MikethePurple
Veteran
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 11:08 am
Location: Portland, OR
x 23

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by MikethePurple » Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:21 pm

VikingLord wrote:
Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:07 pm
MikethePurple wrote:
Sat Mar 21, 2020 12:31 am
With the Cousins move, they seem to be straddling the fence rather than facing up to the fact that they are in a rebuilding mode. Does anyone actually think that with far less talent on defense and given the Diggs trade, offense, that this team will be better next year? Cousins clearly needs to have a significant supporting cast to be successful and they are taking plenty of those pieces away and expecting things to be different/better than previously? That just seems like a gigantic head scratcher.
Are they straddling the fence though?

One could look at the Cousins deal as a long term commitment to him at QB I guess, but I'm not sure I see it that way. If one assumes that there are no plans to elevate Mannion and given that the Vikings are unlikely to make a move for a different starting QB, Cousins gives them some longer term certainty at the starting QB slot, but I don't think that removes their ability to try to find a franchise QB to sit and learn behind him, be that in this year's draft or even next year's.

Put another way, one of those free agency period moves just scored them another 1st round pick. While most mocks have them dutifully searching for Diggs' replacement with that choice, I could see Spielman leverage his 1st rounders and perhaps some combo of his 2nd/3rds to make a move up in this year's draft for one of the top QBs. Not sure he could swing that or who he might target (my guess would be Herbert or Tua), but that might be enough ammo to make a move like that. Then, with Cousins in tow and expectations set appropriately for the next season, said QB could be brought along at a comfortable pace and developed along with whatever other young talent the Vikings secure this year, be that by draft, in FA, or via further trades.

One important point of note with the Cousins' extension that I think supports this theory is that it isn't all guaranteed. A big chunk of it is, but not all of it. It's not like the Vikings are committing to Cousins for a long time. It might just be "long enough".

This is going to be one of the more interesting drafts for the Vikings in recent memory I think...
Jim actually discussed things nicely below so I'll address some of that in another post but I think the piece that I'm disagreeing with is the longer term commitment to Cousins while at the same time, taking away some pieces that were supposed to elevate him-namely Diggs and Kline (specifically addressing the offense in this response). While I don't think Kline is an essential piece, he was adequate last year. And on a unit that doesn't really have the luxury of taking away pieces until it seems like you have a reasonable alternative in place, I highly question this decision. Maybe they see something in Samia or some other guys they have on the roster, but with Elflein performing very poorly it doesn't seem to be smart to take away another piece of an extremely questionable unit. Especially when Cousins has shown that he needs all the help he can get, particularly in the protection side of things.

I don't think Cousins is a terrible quarterback. I think he's a decent quarterback who needs lots of supporting help to get to the next level. I just question the logic of re-committing to him for another theoretical 3 years when I believe he's shown that he can't elevate the play of folks around him on a consistent basis. When you take away good pieces (in Diggs case, great piece) that were helping him succeed and expect better results (because the goal is to always get better), I just don't see how that adds up.

You could be right with the draft and we'll have to see how it plays out (I actually would hope for the scenario that you laid out). My understanding of the extension is that it becomes fully guaranteed if Cousins is on the roster on the 3rd day of the league's new year in 2021. Maybe I have misread those details? So essentially they have to decide by the third day of the 2021 season whether they really are committing to Cousins for the following two years. That, to me is the mistake because his cap numbers go way up and I think that committing that much money to a quarterback who has not shown to play at that elite level is going to hurt the ability of the team to improve in other areas and really move forward. Especially for that length of time. It effectively handcuffs them in turning the page for another several years on a formula that I believe has been shown not to work.
Last edited by MikethePurple on Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
2 x

RandyMoss84
Starter
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:12 pm
x 68

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by RandyMoss84 » Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:32 pm

I do not get the complaints about Cousins, he is a good quarterback, It could have been worse, Cousins could be released and Vikings named Mannion as their starter and says Mannion is our franchise quarterback
0 x

User avatar
MikethePurple
Veteran
Posts: 249
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 11:08 am
Location: Portland, OR
x 23

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by MikethePurple » Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:42 pm

Mothman wrote:
Sat Mar 21, 2020 1:30 pm
J. Kapp 11 wrote:
Sat Mar 21, 2020 11:34 am
You can disagree if you want with how they’re doing things, but to say they’re straddling the fence doesn’t make sense to me.

Why would the Vikings bring in a promising rookie quarterback with the idea that he’ll eventually be the man when they just extended the guy they think IS the man?
I'm not going to speak for Mike but the reason I think "straddling the fence" is an appropriate description is because, to me, it describes the overall approach they're taking (see below).
Obviously reasonable people can disagree about whether Kirk Cousins SHOULD be the man, but it’s hardly a straddle-the-fence move. Cousins’ old contract made him virtually impossible to release, and his extension is pretty much the same. They are putting their eggs in the Cousins basket, which is the polar opposite of straddling the fence.
That's one way to look at it. Extending Cousins was definitely a decisive move but I look at it this way: they've got a "leg" on one side of the fence trying to maintain continuity with Kirk, Mike and Rick and the other "leg" re-shaping the team. I think they recognize the need for significant changes but not the degree of change necessary. They're trying to stick with the comfortable and familiar and achieve new results. To me, that translates to fence-straddling. The Vikes remind me of the Bears in the latter half of the Lovie Smith era, overpaying a QB who has his moments but isn't worth the price, making changes to the coaching staff and roster every year and playing competitive football but clinging to familiar leadership and a strategy that just wasn't ever going to net them the desired result.

You're correct, Cousins' old contract made him impossible to release but they could have taken their lumps with it this year and then moved on with a young QB. They have the potential ammo to get one in this draft but re-signing Cousins makes that unlikely.
Finally, you can rail on the current leadership all you want, but the fact remains ... the Wills are true believers in Spielman and Zimmer. They’re not going anywhere. So we can all sit here and pine for someone else, or we can face the reality that we’re not going to see a regime change anytime soon.
I faced that reality a long time ago. I'm simply criticizing it. The Vikings haven't been to a Super Bowl in over 40 years and the Wilfs plan to get there is to stick with Spielman, Zimmer and Cousins, who have little to nothing on their NFL resumés to suggest they're the people to make that happen. Not only is current leadership not going anywhere, the team probably isn't either. I think we can safely expect to see more of what we've seen for the last 8 years.

This offseason was the perfect time to move on. The Wilfs decided to double down. Yes, that's reality but it's frustrating and disappointing.
I think Jim described much of what my perspective was in this post so I won't repeat it (Thanks Jim :D ) I also addressed some of it in a response to Viking Lord.

You are right that many of the folks that they have released or not brought back on the defensive side makes sense for various reasons given age, production, price tag, and our cap situation in general. They make sense and I'm not necessarily criticizing those moves, it's just a necessity given the circumstances. They are overhauling the defensive side, for obvious reasons and needs. However, to expect that side of the ball to get substantially better this season, I think will be a gigantic task that no one is banking on. So to decide to rebuild that side, lose a huge contributor to the offensive side in Diggs, and then continue on with an offensive strategy that with a great set of skills position contributors couldn't get it done previously, is a mistake. The defensive growing pains will have an impact on the offense and I don't see them being able to overcome those loads, especially when they weren't able to last year and they lost arguably their best receiver.

I just think committing so much money to a quarterback that needs a substantial supporting cast as we've seen over the past two years, taking away much of that supporting cast, and then thinking this is the formula forward is a mistake. Jim described the fence straddling well so I won't repeat it, but to me they are moving forward with a philosophy that at it's best has not worked for the previous 2 seasons and are now taking away significant contributors to that philosophy and now somehow expecting a different result. The past few seasons have shown that this philosophy has its limits and to bring back the most central piece for another 3 years with a high price tag, with a diminished supporting cast is just a flawed philosophy.

If they hit on all of their draft picks and become immediate contributors and the young guys that they now have on the roster can make gigantic leaps, I'll be gladly proven wrong. I just think that is extremely unlikely and continuing down the same path is just a recipe for mediocrity and stagnation at best for another few years.
Last edited by MikethePurple on Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0 x

User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Pro Bowl Elite Player
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 138

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by VikingsVictorious » Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:49 pm

Mothman wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:37 am
VikingsVictorious wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:28 am
Not overpaying Cousins one red cent. That is the price of a good NFL QB in today's game.
People keep saying this as if it ends the conversation but Cousins has the 5th highest average salary per year among NFL QBs so he's not just getting the going rate for QBs, he's getting the top rate. The 4 QBs ahead of him have all been to the Super Bowl and 3 of them have won it. Paying that kind of price isn't the only way to address the position but since it's the way the Vikes have chosen, it needs to be justified.

Again: the bottom line shouldn't be what the market price is anyway. It should be whether he's actually worth the investment.
Cousins is in the top five because he is the most recent new or extended contract. By the time the next five contracts are extended Cousins will be close to 10th highest paid. However, I will take his 26-6 TD to Int and 107 QBR from last year and winning a playoff game last year as justification for how much we pay him.
1 x

User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6453
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 220

Re: Looks like Griff is gone

Post by VikingLord » Sun Mar 22, 2020 1:10 pm

VikingsVictorious wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 1:21 am
WR might be our biggest need and I don't think selecting a WR in the first would be a reach unless 5 or more are gone before we pick. Williamson was a huge reach. He did not have the pedigree of a #7 overall draft pick.
I don't agree it is the biggest need per se, but whether choosing one in the 1st makes sense really depends on how the draft plays out to that point. As you point out, the Vikings don't need a reach at either 1st round choice just because Diggs is gone. If the right player is there I'm fine if they take a WR.
0 x