Kirk Cousins is having an MVP season

[StumpHunter]

Kirk cousins has never won more than 9 games in a season and may not win more than 9 games this season. For all the "statistical" hype around him, he sure doesn't do a lot of winning, even when he does have a good offensive line.

Well In Washington he had a bottom 3 defense all 3 years and had a bottom 10 rushing offense. If Kirk cousins didn’t play for them, they’d probably have about 2 wins. He was the only reason they were .500

Washington was not bottom 3 all three years and I am not sure where you are getting that information from. In scoring the thing that actually helps a team win or lose, they were 16th in 2015 (4 spots behind the Vikings), 24th in 2016 and 20th last year. Not great defenses, but in all 3 years there were teams with better records who had worse defenses. He also had one of the best pass blocking lines in the NFL in 2015 and 2016 and a very good WR corp. In 2017 both groups regressed and so did Cousins.

Kirk left that team and they were better with Alex Smith, btw. They might not win another game, but that is only because their starting and backup QB went down. Otherwise they are probably edging us out of a playoff spot.

[Cliff]

Kirk left that team and they were better with Alex Smith, btw. They might not win another game, but that is only because their starting and backup QB went down. Otherwise they are probably edging us out of a playoff spot.

Washington has a much better defense this year than they have in the last 3. I think Kirk would have done about as well as Alex Smith did there before he went down wins wise. I don't think he's bad enough to tank a team on his own ... I just don't think he's good enough to pull a team out of a losing situation - that momentum shift that is needed sometimes in a game. It doesn't seem like that happens with him.

Interesting thought: Who thinks the Vikings win as much if Cousins is QB last year? The offensive line was just as bad, really. Case Keenum was pressured on 39% of his passes which was 30th in the league. However, he was actually doing really well under pressure;

What Tom Brady And Case Keenum Do Better Than Anyone Else

It’s not so much about the volume of pressure put on a quarterback, but it’s how he handles it in the big moments on third down, in the red zone, and with the game on the line. Fortunately, that type of context is what an advanced metric such as ESPN’s QBR is able to adjust for.

In 2017, Minnesota’s Case Keenum (58.5) and New England’s Tom Brady (54.0) led all quarterbacks in QBR under pressure with marks that rank among the top 10 in all seasons tracked since 2009. Brady’s placement may not come as a big surprise, but Keenum’s breakout season in Minnesota continues to be one of the wildest success stories since Kurt Warner went from bagging groceries to Super Bowl MVP in 1999.

You could probably argue that Keenum's ability to throw under pressure opened up the run game too.

In the same year Cousins was pressured less and preformed far worse under it;
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat- ... ssure-2017

[Pondering Her Percy]

Well In Washington he had a bottom 3 defense all 3 years and had a bottom 10 rushing offense. If Kirk cousins didn’t play for them, they’d probably have about 2 wins. He was the only reason they were .500

Washington was not bottom 3 all three years and I am not sure where you are getting that information from. In scoring the thing that actually helps a team win or lose, they were 16th in 2015 (4 spots behind the Vikings), 24th in 2016 and 20th last year. Not great defenses, but in all 3 years there were teams with better records who had worse defenses. He also had one of the best pass blocking lines in the NFL in 2015 and 2016 and a very good WR corp. In 2017 both groups regressed and so did Cousins.

Kirk left that team and they were better with Alex Smith, btw. They might not win another game, but that is only because their starting and backup QB went down. Otherwise they are probably edging us out of a playoff spot.

In total offense (yards given up), they were in the bottom 3-4 every year. Whether you're looking at scoring, yards, sacks, INTs, etc. if you're giving up that many yards on defense, your defense usually isnt very good. And the reason they are better with Smith is because their defense got significantly better but good try lol. Their defense went backwards since the QBs went down but they were top 10 in total defense for a while and were top 5 in that all important scoring stat you keep mentioning. Now they are 8th. Look at their offensive numbers. 27th in points, 27th in yards, 25th in passing and 16th in rushing. 6 out of their 10 games they didnt surpass 20 points with Smith at the helm. That stat alone shows that they were winning because of the defense. Not the offense. So lets not say "they were better with Smith". They were better because their defense was actually playing well. That was not the case when Cousins was there.

You want to talk scoring AND total offense? Well the Redskins were 10th in scoring and 17th in yards in 2015 (Cousins first year as a starter), 12th in scoring and 3rd in total offense in 2016, and 16th in scoring and 16th in total offense in 2017 (the year his OL got destroyed). Since Alex Smith has been there, they are 27th in scoring and 27th in total offense. That right there tells you the defense in Washington is DRASTICALLY better than it was in the past. Really any of the 3 years Cousins was there. He's going into New Orleans putting up 31 points last year and LOSING! Putting up 30 on us (the best defense in the NFL) and LOSING! Pretty sure Kirk Cousins did his part. It was the rest of the team not doing theirs.

Alex Smith was the classic average to below average QB he was in KC in Washington too. A below average 6.6 YPA by checking the ball down, 62% completion percentage (below average) and 10 TDs in 10 games. You not seeing these things and actually looking into the WHY behind Washington being better this year just shows me how much you truly struggle seeing talent in a QB. You saying that simply shows me you said in your head "Well Washingtons record was good this year and Cousins was .500 in Washington so they were better with Alex Smith" lol. No, doesnt work that way.

But again, didnt want to get in another discussion with you but by me quoting someone else, here I am. Say what you want, but it's nothing that's changing my mind

[StumpHunter]

Washington was not bottom 3 all three years and I am not sure where you are getting that information from. In scoring the thing that actually helps a team win or lose, they were 16th in 2015 (4 spots behind the Vikings), 24th in 2016 and 20th last year. Not great defenses, but in all 3 years there were teams with better records who had worse defenses. He also had one of the best pass blocking lines in the NFL in 2015 and 2016 and a very good WR corp. In 2017 both groups regressed and so did Cousins.

Kirk left that team and they were better with Alex Smith, btw. They might not win another game, but that is only because their starting and backup QB went down. Otherwise they are probably edging us out of a playoff spot.

In total offense (yards given up), they were in the bottom 3-4 every year. Whether you're looking at scoring, yards, sacks, INTs, etc. if you're giving up that many yards on defense, your defense usually isnt very good. And the reason they are better with Smith is because their defense got significantly better but good try lol. Their defense went backwards since the QBs went down but they were top 10 in total defense for a while and were top 5 in that all important scoring stat you keep mentioning. Now they are 8th. Look at their offensive numbers. 27th in points, 27th in yards, 25th in passing and 16th in rushing. 6 out of their 10 games they didnt surpass 20 points with Smith at the helm. That stat alone shows that they were winning because of the defense. Not the offense. So lets not say "they were better with Smith". They were better because their defense was actually playing well. That was not the case when Cousins was there.

You want to talk scoring AND total offense? Well the Redskins were 10th in scoring and 17th in yards in 2015 (Cousins first year as a starter), 12th in scoring and 3rd in total offense in 2016, and 16th in scoring and 16th in total offense in 2017 (the year his OL got destroyed). Since Alex Smith has been there, they are 27th in scoring and 27th in total offense. That right there tells you the defense in Washington is DRASTICALLY better than it was in the past. Really any of the 3 years Cousins was there. He's going into New Orleans putting up 31 points last year and LOSING! Putting up 30 on us (the best defense in the NFL) and LOSING! Pretty sure Kirk Cousins did his part. It was the rest of the team not doing theirs.

Alex Smith was the classic average to below average QB he was in KC in Washington too. A below average 6.6 YPA by checking the ball down, 62% completion percentage (below average) and 10 TDs in 10 games. You not seeing these things and actually looking into the WHY behind Washington being better this year just shows me how much you truly struggle seeing talent in a QB. You saying that simply shows me you said in your head "Well Washingtons record was good this year and Cousins was .500 in Washington so they were better with Alex Smith" lol. No, doesnt work that way.

But again, didnt want to get in another discussion with you but by me quoting someone else, here I am. Say what you want, but it's nothing that's changing my mind

Washington's defense was worse this year than last while Alex was still healthy, giving up more points (the thing that impacts wins, wins being what the conversation is about) per drive. Their offense has struggled to score lately, and has dropped to almost as bad as ours with McCoy and now Sanchez playing QB. That's right, we are as worse than a team lead by Alex Smith, Colt McCoy and Mark Sanchez at scoring points AND moving the football.

[Pondering Her Percy]

In total offense (yards given up), they were in the bottom 3-4 every year. Whether you're looking at scoring, yards, sacks, INTs, etc. if you're giving up that many yards on defense, your defense usually isnt very good. And the reason they are better with Smith is because their defense got significantly better but good try lol. Their defense went backwards since the QBs went down but they were top 10 in total defense for a while and were top 5 in that all important scoring stat you keep mentioning. Now they are 8th. Look at their offensive numbers. 27th in points, 27th in yards, 25th in passing and 16th in rushing. 6 out of their 10 games they didnt surpass 20 points with Smith at the helm. That stat alone shows that they were winning because of the defense. Not the offense. So lets not say "they were better with Smith". They were better because their defense was actually playing well. That was not the case when Cousins was there.

You want to talk scoring AND total offense? Well the Redskins were 10th in scoring and 17th in yards in 2015 (Cousins first year as a starter), 12th in scoring and 3rd in total offense in 2016, and 16th in scoring and 16th in total offense in 2017 (the year his OL got destroyed). Since Alex Smith has been there, they are 27th in scoring and 27th in total offense. That right there tells you the defense in Washington is DRASTICALLY better than it was in the past. Really any of the 3 years Cousins was there. He's going into New Orleans putting up 31 points last year and LOSING! Putting up 30 on us (the best defense in the NFL) and LOSING! Pretty sure Kirk Cousins did his part. It was the rest of the team not doing theirs.

Alex Smith was the classic average to below average QB he was in KC in Washington too. A below average 6.6 YPA by checking the ball down, 62% completion percentage (below average) and 10 TDs in 10 games. You not seeing these things and actually looking into the WHY behind Washington being better this year just shows me how much you truly struggle seeing talent in a QB. You saying that simply shows me you said in your head "Well Washingtons record was good this year and Cousins was .500 in Washington so they were better with Alex Smith" lol. No, doesnt work that way.

But again, didnt want to get in another discussion with you but by me quoting someone else, here I am. Say what you want, but it's nothing that's changing my mind

Washington's defense was worse this year than last while Alex was still healthy, giving up more points (the thing that impacts wins, wins being what the conversation is about) per drive. Their offense has struggled to score lately, and has dropped to almost as bad as ours with McCoy and now Sanchez playing QB. That's right, we are as worse than a team lead by Alex Smith, Colt McCoy and Mark Sanchez at scoring points AND moving the football.

Last year the Redskins defense was tied for the 5th MOST points allowed per game! This year they are 8th LEAST points per game allowed! How is this years defense not drastically better than last years? All you want to do is talk about "scoring" and how that's all that matters. But now you're sitting here fighting what you preach. That's like me saying this years Vikings defense is better than last years. Even though last year we allowed the least points against per game in the league and this year we are allowing the 14th least.

Are you going to argue that? Or are you just going to argue anything positive I (or anyone else for that matter) say about Kirk Cousins? I'm starting to get to the point where it's starting to seem like you're arguing just to argue. And that you are starting to lose meaning and consistency behind your posts. I mean I'm putting clear as day numbers out here proving that the Redskins defense is much improved this year compared to the last 3 years and you sit here and continue to battle. Any statistic I provide, you're trying to find one little tiny flaw with and then in turn, push that and get completely off topic. This went from Cousins having an "MVP season", to you defending Case Keenum and you defending Teddy Bridgewater to no end, to who has a better OL to who holds the ball longer and now to the Washington Redskins defense.

Point is, I could sit here and tell you that grass is green, and you're going to find a way to argue it. You dont like Kirk Cousins. You dont agree with the signing. We get it. Nobody on here is saying he is the next MVP. But he is our QB and it's something you're going to have to live with. But man oh man, you are so combative right now over every little detail it's not even funny. When Kapp said before the GB game that Cousins could go 37-38 for 800 yards and 6 TDS and you'd be on here arguing how bad his one incompletion was, I gotta agree with him 100%!! It's never ending with you. I stopped one argument and walked away and you just chime in on another one with me. Enough dude.

[StumpHunter]

Washington's defense was worse this year than last while Alex was still healthy, giving up more points (the thing that impacts wins, wins being what the conversation is about) per drive. Their offense has struggled to score lately, and has dropped to almost as bad as ours with McCoy and now Sanchez playing QB. That's right, we are as worse than a team lead by Alex Smith, Colt McCoy and Mark Sanchez at scoring points AND moving the football.

Last year the Redskins defense was tied for the 5th MOST points allowed per game! This year they are 8th LEAST points per game allowed! How is this years defense not drastically better than last years? All you want to do is talk about "scoring" and how that's all that matters. But now you're sitting here fighting what you preach. That's like me saying this years Vikings defense is better than last years. Even though last year we allowed the least points against per game in the league and this year we are allowing the 14th least.

Are you going to argue that? Or are you just going to argue anything positive I (or anyone else for that matter) say about Kirk Cousins? I'm starting to get to the point where it's starting to seem like you're arguing just to argue. And that you are starting to lose meaning and consistency behind your posts. I mean I'm putting clear as day numbers out here proving that the Redskins defense is much improved this year compared to the last 3 years and you sit here and continue to battle. Any statistic I provide, you're trying to find one little tiny flaw with and then in turn, push that and get completely off topic. This went from Cousins having an "MVP season", to you defending Case Keenum and you defending Teddy Bridgewater to no end, to who has a better OL to who holds the ball longer and now to the Washington Redskins defense.

Point is, I could sit here and tell you that grass is green, and you're going to find a way to argue it. You dont like Kirk Cousins. You dont agree with the signing. We get it. Nobody on here is saying he is the next MVP. But he is our QB and it's something you're going to have to live with. But man oh man, you are so combative right now over every little detail it's not even funny. When Kapp said before the GB game that Cousins could go 37-38 for 800 yards and 6 TDS and you'd be on here arguing how bad his one incompletion was, I gotta agree with him 100%!! It's never ending with you. I stopped one argument and walked away and you just chime in on another one with me. Enough dude.

So, our DEFENSE has not given up the 14th most points. They have not been on the field when 3 TDs have been scored, and should not be punished statistically for those 3 TDs. Yea they are worse than last year, but are still 6th in points given up per drive which is good enough to win with, don't you think?

Washington's defense last year did not give up the 5th most points per game. Again, Cousins threw 2 pick sixes and another 2 fumbles were returned for TDs while the defense wasn't on the field. They gave up a very solid 1.82 points per drive last season, compared to this year's 1.92. Certainly not bottom 3, like you lied about earlier.

Points per drive is just a better metric of measurement for how well a defense or offense does, since it does not punish a defense for its offense throwing pick sixes, and having a bunch of short drives, and it doesn't punish an offense for having long, sustained drives and shortening the game. I know you don't like the stat, because it invalidates a lot of your arguments, but it is a better stat than points per game. Not perfect, but better.

Cousins is a very good passer who would be great with a lot of time to throw. He does not have that here, and has not played well because of it. I personally would prefer a QB who could win games despite his line not being perfect, or at the very least, who's play helped the line instead of hurt it. I know you see nothing wrong with the guy and want to blame everyone but him and good for you for being able to do that. I wish I could live in as much denial as you, it would make this season a lot more fun.

[PurpleKoolaid]

PHP calling someone else 'combative'. Pot meet kettle.

[Pondering Her Percy]

PHP calling someone else 'combative'. Pot meet kettle.

Lol coming from you....the biggest complainer on here. That post doesn’t surprise me because it’s you through and through. Bring NOTHING to the board but chime in a trolling comment like that one....haha classic! Have a good night troll

[Pondering Her Percy]

Last year the Redskins defense was tied for the 5th MOST points allowed per game! This year they are 8th LEAST points per game allowed! How is this years defense not drastically better than last years? All you want to do is talk about "scoring" and how that's all that matters. But now you're sitting here fighting what you preach. That's like me saying this years Vikings defense is better than last years. Even though last year we allowed the least points against per game in the league and this year we are allowing the 14th least.

Are you going to argue that? Or are you just going to argue anything positive I (or anyone else for that matter) say about Kirk Cousins? I'm starting to get to the point where it's starting to seem like you're arguing just to argue. And that you are starting to lose meaning and consistency behind your posts. I mean I'm putting clear as day numbers out here proving that the Redskins defense is much improved this year compared to the last 3 years and you sit here and continue to battle. Any statistic I provide, you're trying to find one little tiny flaw with and then in turn, push that and get completely off topic. This went from Cousins having an "MVP season", to you defending Case Keenum and you defending Teddy Bridgewater to no end, to who has a better OL to who holds the ball longer and now to the Washington Redskins defense.

Point is, I could sit here and tell you that grass is green, and you're going to find a way to argue it. You dont like Kirk Cousins. You dont agree with the signing. We get it. Nobody on here is saying he is the next MVP. But he is our QB and it's something you're going to have to live with. But man oh man, you are so combative right now over every little detail it's not even funny. When Kapp said before the GB game that Cousins could go 37-38 for 800 yards and 6 TDS and you'd be on here arguing how bad his one incompletion was, I gotta agree with him 100%!! It's never ending with you. I stopped one argument and walked away and you just chime in on another one with me. Enough dude.

So, our DEFENSE has not given up the 14th most points. They have not been on the field when 3 TDs have been scored, and should not be punished statistically for those 3 TDs. Yea they are worse than last year, but are still 6th in points given up per drive which is good enough to win with, don't you think?

Washington's defense last year did not give up the 5th most points per game. Again, Cousins threw 2 pick sixes and another 2 fumbles were returned for TDs while the defense wasn't on the field. They gave up a very solid 1.82 points per drive last season, compared to this year's 1.92. Certainly not bottom 3, like you lied about earlier.

Points per drive is just a better metric of measurement for how well a defense or offense does, since it does not punish a defense for its offense throwing pick sixes, and having a bunch of short drives, and it doesn't punish an offense for having long, sustained drives and shortening the game. I know you don't like the stat, because it invalidates a lot of your arguments, but it is a better stat than points per game. Not perfect, but better.

Cousins is a very good passer who would be great with a lot of time to throw. He does not have that here, and has not played well because of it. I personally would prefer a QB who could win games despite his line not being perfect, or at the very least, who's play helped the line instead of hurt it. I know you see nothing wrong with the guy and want to blame everyone but him and good for you for being able to do that. I wish I could live in as much denial as you, it would make this season a lot more fun.

Lol yeah you’re right I’m “lying” in my posts. I’m not wasting my time going through a whole stat line of the redskins defense. It’s obvious to any redskins fan or football fan in general (except you) that they are a significantly better defense this year (I’m starting to think the only reason you won’t agree with it is just because it “helps” your argument with cousins which is sad). And if you read my posts, I have called out cousins at least a handful of times on here. But I’m not going to sit here and bash Kirk cousins for him wiping his as$ with the wrong hand. And you’ve been called to the carpet more than once about it. You’re a hater. Plain and simple. You’re going to find the one minuscule flaw in a stat line, the one flaw in his game and no matter what, always think he’s not a good QB. Problem is, you couldn’t judge talent at the QB position if your life depended on it. You defending Teddy Bridgewater alone showed that. I’ve said it a million times and I’ll say it again, for a fan base that is so harsh on QBs, defending Teddy Bridgewater and his stats (or lack thereof) literally makes me laugh out loud. I’ll leave it at that

[PurpleKoolaid]

PHP calling someone else 'combative'. Pot meet kettle.

Lol coming from you....the biggest complainer on here. That post doesn’t surprise me because it’s you through and through. Bring NOTHING to the board but chime in a trolling comment like that one....haha classic! Have a good night troll

Look in the mirror PHP. All you have been doing in virtually every post is COMPLAINING about what the poster said. Its like you think those of us who dont agree with you are insane and we MUST change our mind.

Also, my posts aernt combative. Most of the ones ive read from you are. And insulting. It gets old, which is why I rarely post here or on game day chat. But thats going to change. Ive I have to foe you for another year I will.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Lol coming from you....the biggest complainer on here. That post doesn’t surprise me because it’s you through and through. Bring NOTHING to the board but chime in a trolling comment like that one....haha classic! Have a good night troll

Look in the mirror PHP. All you have been doing in virtually every post is COMPLAINING about what the poster said. Its like you think those of us who dont agree with you are insane and we MUST change our mind.

Also, my posts aernt combative. Most of the ones ive read from you are. And insulting. It gets old, which is why I rarely post here or on game day chat. But thats going to change. Ive I have to foe you for another year I will.

First of all, you’re dead wrong. Kapp and I just had a disagreement on Seattle’s OL. Wasn’t combative. Wasn’t insulting. Same has happened with guys like mansquatch as well. But yeah I guess that means I think guys that don’t agree with me are “insane and must change their mind” Problem is, you only read what you wanna read.

Your posts aren’t combative? Maybe YOU should look in the mirror. And the worst part about it is yeah, you don’t post on here nearly as much. You just troll. You find something you don’t like that either I say in a thread or a chat and you try to start crap with me. And if I’m not responding you come back with a sarcastic “I’m sure PHP thinks this....”. That is the definition of trolling. I’m not even talking to you or responding to you and you intentionally try to start crap. You just did it in this thread too. Foe me. Please. You post just to call me out or complain. It brings NOTHING to the board. If you’re going to post on here, bring something relevant. Bring statistics, bring reason, bring something. Instead of trolling or complaining about how bad the Vikings are. If I’m not responding to you or even involved in a chat, don’t try to call my name out. I’m not responding to you for a reason. If you wanna chat like everyone else, feel free but if you’re coming on here to troll like you have been and call me out, then foe me or knock it off. It’s tiring. You’re the constant negative poster on this forum that brings little and loves to troll. But my posts are “insulting”? When I’m not responding to you or even involved in a thread but you’re throwing my name out there to try and get something going or “insulting” me? Like you said earlier, pot meet kettle PK.

You are the new Demi. Not anything to be proud of. I got out of the game chat because of guys like you that come on there to complain, overreact or troll. Yet you stay silent when the Vikings are winning (exactly how Demi was). Demi stopped posting when Zimmer got here and this team started to turn around. Weird. Either way, I’m done listening to your trolling. It’s gone on for years and nobody has ever put a stop to it. Foe me and you’ll have nothing to say. It will make my day

[Bowhunting Viking]

Ahh the our wonderful world of internet and social media. Man it's a good thing this discussion isn't taking place face to face. Where I come from this would end up in some fists, elbows and knees flying and some blood and teeth on the floor. Lol. Just having fun and trying to lighten the mood.
Man guys try and chill out just a bit. I get it's a frustrating season. I expected alot more too.
But man, and TRUST me as an old street brawler who would blast you in the face for even looking at me wrong, I've learned in life that we all have our opinions. Its still hard for me to let stuff roll off my back. I won't ever let anyone walk on me or harm my family, but there are alot more pressing issues in life than arguing over stats and opinions like we see here sometimes.
Man I want the Vikes to win the SB and be successful as much as anyone else. This past Jan I got a reality check. While the Vikes were making their push to the SB my mom was laying in the hospital fighting for her life after a massive brain bleed stroke. I spent morning till night for 3 wks at the hospital. The only break I took was for the games. The Saints game was a much needed boost. I wore Viking shirts and my coats every day, and i had so many hospital employees and other patient's families pulling for the Vikes just for my dad and I because we were such a purple presence at the hospital. Then the Eagles game happened. It hurt for sure. Broke my heart. But the next morning my mom was moved from critical care to a rehab room. Thankfully she is still here and doing pretty well. That was when I realized that , and dont get me wrong I still bleed purple and am still as hardcore as ever, but I saw that in the end it's still a game and a form of entertainment.
That's why I guess when I see some of the constant hating going on between members here I just go back about 11 months ago and reflect. Heck I woulda prob been jumping in some of these arguments before that.
Now I come here to talk about the team I love and enjoy it with like minded people. I hope to have fun here, bring a little humor on the game day chat, and enjoy some conversations with other fans.
I also lost a friend and co worker my age, 54 , to cancer a few wks ago so I'm a little more reflective right now. I doubt his family see the importance in arguing over and over with someone about our QB right now.
If I'm out of line I apologize, my gosh I've grown up cuz I never woulda posted that a few yrs ago. But hopefully ppl can just chill a little and agree to disagree and stop the personal fighting amongst themselves.
That's all I got. And believe me if ya agree with anything I've said God Bless Ya. If ya don't God Bless ya too. I wont get pulled into any arguments or negative posts.
I'm just here to enjoy some good conversations , and even some disagreements when done in a civil manner.
I would like to end this with SKOL VIKINGS... go to Seattle, prove the doubters wrong and hopefully take a step closer to getting into the playoffs. Get in and anything can happen. Everyone have a good day.

[PacificNorseWest]

Kirk's primetime record is what worries me. And I think he's what, 0-6 on MNF? At first, you just kinda ignore some of that stuff since he plays for a different team and such, but at some point, you have to call it what it is. I think the Vikings matchup very well with Seattle and should win the game. If Kirk under-performs and they lose, things might get ugly here and in the media.

[Texas Vike]

Kirk's primetime record is what worries me. And I think he's what, 0-6 on MNF? At first, you just kinda ignore some of that stuff since he plays for a different team and such, but at some point, you have to call it what it is. I think the Vikings matchup very well with Seattle and should win the game. If Kirk under-performs and they lose, things might get ugly here and in the media.

Do you watch a lot of Seahawks games, living out there? Everything I've read sounds like most folks favor SEA tomorrow; you're the first I've read of someone liking the Vikings' chances.

It's a big game. Feels particularly big for this season and for Cousins, Zimmer, maybe even Spielmann. They went all in with the 84 million dollar man, so it's time to put up or shut up. A satisfying ending to this season can start tomorrow night... or it could all blow up and be a major disappointment.

[PacificNorseWest]

Kirk's primetime record is what worries me. And I think he's what, 0-6 on MNF? At first, you just kinda ignore some of that stuff since he plays for a different team and such, but at some point, you have to call it what it is. I think the Vikings matchup very well with Seattle and should win the game. If Kirk under-performs and they lose, things might get ugly here and in the media.

Do you watch a lot of Seahawks games, living out there? Everything I've read sounds like most folks favor SEA tomorrow; you're the first I've read of someone liking the Vikings' chances.

I watch my fair share, definitely. Not to mention hearing all the sports radio chatter about them.

It's not surprising most favor Seattle given the current trends of each team, but I know both teams well and if you look at it, I think the Vikings matchup very well.

I wrote something on the Seahawks somewhere else in the thread, but essentially, on offense, they are very efficient. They run the ball very well and when they throw it's usually productive. Of the quarterbacks who have thrown at least 25 TD's, Russ has the least attempts by far out of those QB's, so they are very dependent on a strong run game and then picking their spots in the pass game (lots of PA). Against the Vikings defense, that won't be so easy with Linval and Richardson eating up the inside. An underrated aspect of Danielle Hunter's game is stopping the run, so they won't be able to gash the Vikings like I think most expect. They're running backs aren't flashy and their key cog, Chris Carson, is a guy who is more of an AP-type rather than the elusive kind of running back. The way the Vikings rally to the ball as a defensive unit, they should be all over Carson. Basically, even though Seattle's offensive line is much improved from a season ago, the Vikings defensive front is easily the better unit of the two and will wear them down. Without the run game clicking, it makes things very difficult for Russell. In 3 of their 5 losses, Russell had over 30 attempts, which is not their recipe. While Wilson can create magic, he's still susceptible to getting sacked and their Oline isn't as great at pass pro as it is in the running game department. Lockett has been Seattle's most effective receiver. He doesn't get all too many receptions, but he usually beats a team deep once or twice a game and usually for a score. Doug Baldwin coming off injury this season has not been to the level he has been in his career. The Vikings should be able to handle the WR's and their front 4 should give Russ fits when the pass by getting a ton of pressure. I imagine the Vikings pick their spots to blitz again because if you blitz and miss, Russell will eat them up by extending the play, but Zimmer has done a great job this season in picking his spots to blitz. I just really don't see Seattle's offense having the day it will take to win. Minnesota's defense is the best they've seen by far since playing Chicago in week 2, where they got blown out. Minnesota's defensive speed is much more than that of Seattle's offense and I think that will present challenges.


On the other side of the ball, Seattle's defense is good. The secondary is young and opportunistic, LB's are one of the better units in the league with holdovers from that SB team with Wagner and Wright. They aren't the best up front though and Kirk should have time. They are also dead last against the run when it comes to yards per attempt. By saying Minnesota wins, I'm assuming one thing for their offense in that Zimmer gets to DeFilippo and the they run the ball like they want to -- much like Seattle's recipe. All the circumstances are there to really get the run game going and it keeps the opportunistic defense at bay. Vikings will be able to take shots against Seattle, but it's definitely incumbent on having a run game. Seattle struggled stopping the Rams and while Minnesota doesn't have an offense with that explosion, they still have great talent and a duo of receivers that Seattle hasn't seen. Not to mention that Rudolph is coming on late, so Kirk should have no problems spreading the ball, taking his shots and the offense putting up points.

My main worry...Easily, the biggest worry is Kirk and holding onto the football. No fumbles and a clean passing game -- which given the gameplan I mention that I think they will employ, he shouldn't need to force anything and can take what's there and still have a big day -- and I think Minnesota controls the clock when they need to and scores points and they will win.

Playing in Seattle is a factor, but it all comes down to playing the game and again, I just like how Minnesota matches up with Seattle, so it shouldn't matter where they play.