Answering everyone’s Cousins questions

[Cliff]

A better example is Sunday's game against the Chiefs. The Vikings trailed going into the quarter, took the lead, then lost it on a walk-off field goal.

And see in my mind it's an example of exactly my problem with Cousins. He had a good game overall and the team didn't lose because of his play. That said, after KC tied the game up the Vikings had the ball for 2 more drives. Cousins went 1/4 for -7 yards.

[StumpHunter]

First off what you said in your post pretty much sums it up. If somebody disagrees with your opinion they don't know football.
We paid Cousins good money to come in here and be a winning QB...Not a 500 QB, I don't think many of us expected last season.
He's 0-10-1 against winning teams with us.

Going into Arrowhead all we needed was a decent game from Cousins. He has only threw less than 50% with the Vikings 2 times and Sunday was one of them.
12 over throws, 0-9 when under pressure and the short slide was just
Not to mention not seeing wide open receivers.
Now lucky for Cousins the loss was more on coaching than him.
A close game against a winning team and we couldn't get it done. And that loss really hurt us.

I'm going to leave it at that...

If Cousins threw 10 passes and 5 were incomplete(50%) and the other 5 were TD's and the Vikings lost, fans would be complaining that Cousins didn't do enough to win the game.

If we lost he technically wouldn't have done enough to win the game.

[StumpHunter]

When the ball was in teddys hands to win us the game, specifically Arizona and Denver, he’s blew it, double clutched and held it too long and he got strip sacked both times.

Your whole post proves VikeFan's point, but this in particular is funny, because I am 100% certain that if someone went after Cousins for his fumble at the end of the Rams game, you would absolutely lose your sh*t.

I don't think anyone has actually ever done that though, because a QB fumbling when their trying to make a play at the end of a game they have played well in and their offensive line has a massive breakdown and gives up a bad sack isn't not being clutch.

Maybe I am wrong though and people have gone after Cousins for that play. If that is the case, I would love to read your reaction to it. Considering how quickly you have jumped to blame the offensive line for ALL of Cousins' other fumbles, my guess is you wouldn't agree with them about Cousins being to blame. Just a guess though.

[Pondering Her Percy]

When the ball was in teddys hands to win us the game, specifically Arizona and Denver, he’s blew it, double clutched and held it too long and he got strip sacked both times.

Your whole post proves VikeFan's point, but this in particular is funny, because I am 100% certain that if someone went after Cousins for his fumble at the end of the Rams game, you would absolutely lose your sh*t.

I don't think anyone has actually ever done that though, because a QB fumbling when their trying to make a play at the end of a game they have played well in and their offensive line has a massive breakdown and gives up a bad sack isn't not being clutch.

Maybe I am wrong though and people have gone after Cousins for that play. If that is the case, I would love to read your reaction to it. Considering how quickly you have jumped to blame the offensive line for ALL of Cousins' other fumbles, my guess is you wouldn't agree with them about Cousins being to blame. Just a guess though.

I have NOT blamed the OL for all of Cousins fumbles. You see what you want to see. I know one of Cousins fumbled vs. Buffalo last year happened insanely fast because Reiff got burned by Jerry Hughes like he did all game. The other is when he DID hold onto the ball too and got strip sacked from behind. That's on Cousins. There were others but I'm not going to dissect every fumble he's had. But I have quickly figured out that that is what bothers you. When I bring up a point that there may be another problem other than Kirk Cousins. Not that I'm always trying to direct blame somewhere else but if the OL is playing bad, I'm going to bring it up. If the defense is playing bad, I'm going to bring it up. If the coaching isnt up to par, I'm going to bring it up. And talk about these things extensively. I'm not going to say, "yeah the D wasnt great buttt Kirk this and Kirk that and Kirk cant win". I know that is something you flock to doing more so I think when I expose something that also could have had a major play in what went on, it takes away from your "cousins sucks" argument and then you twist it into me having a man crush on him and defending him for everything. Just my take...

[Pondering Her Percy]

If Cousins threw 10 passes and 5 were incomplete(50%) and the other 5 were TD's and the Vikings lost, fans would be complaining that Cousins didn't do enough to win the game.

If we lost he technically wouldn't have done enough to win the game.

No clearly it means that someone else didnt do enough. That's the part you always miss. You think it's always the QBs job to win the game. No it's the teams job. If Kirk Cousins throws for 5 TDs and we lose, clearly the D didnt do their job. Sometimes it's others that need to do more to win the game. Not always the QB. I know you dont see it that way and if we lose 42-41 you'll find reason to complain about Cousins. Cousins doesnt make tackles, cover WRs, blitz the QB, kick field goals, etc. He can only do so much. And if he does his job and another player/unit doesnt and we lose then it's going to be directed at them. Not Cousins. At least it shouldnt be, you'll still do it.

[StumpHunter]

On Cousins game losing fumble against the Rams:

Second, Cousins arm was hit when he was pulling back to throw, after Rashod Hill got smoked. But yeah what is Kirk thinking? I feel like literally no matter what happens in any game, it's Cousins' fault in your eyes. How about Rashod Hill holds up against a no-name DE when the game is on the line

Not very consistent with what you said about Teddy's fumbles...

[VikingLord]

If Cousins threw 10 passes and 5 were incomplete(50%) and the other 5 were TD's and the Vikings lost, fans would be complaining that Cousins didn't do enough to win the game.

I disagree. It all depends on context.

If Cousins did what you described and the Vikings still lost, while it wouldn't be likely that he was primarily responsible for the loss, he still very well could be.

In your example, if he threw 10 passes and 5 went for TDs, while the other 5 were intercepted and returned for touchdowns by the opposing defense, he still could very well be blamed for the loss.

While that is unlikely, it illustrates that all wins and losses occur in the context of a larger picture composed of coaching, offensive and defensive playcalling, penalties, injuries, etc. You can't cover up one part of that picture and be able to interpret what is going on in the whole picture.

I've said it elsewhere, but rarely do I see Cousins being solely blamed for losses. His performance is critiqued, usually under a microscope, but rarely is he singled out as the sole reason for a loss. The level of criticism he gets usually reflects the magnitude of the errors he makes. And when he's played well, as he did during the 4 game win streak, he's usually received equally effusive credit from most fans.

I mean, to put this into context, Xavier Rhodes got a ton of criticism after his play against both Washington and Detroit. Those were both wins, but Rhodes was singled out due to his play, and deservedly so. Is that unfair to Rhodes? He didn't think so as he admitted he didn't play all that well.

If there is a conversation out there critical of a pro player's level of play, it's likely valid, and it's usually solely up to that player to change that conversation. If Cousins plays well and consistently, especially in big games against the better teams, he can easily shut the mouths of every one of his critics.

[Raptorman]

A better example is Sunday's game against the Chiefs. The Vikings trailed going into the quarter, took the lead, then lost it on a walk-off field goal.

And see in my mind it's an example of exactly my problem with Cousins. He had a good game overall and the team didn't lose because of his play. That said, after KC tied the game up the Vikings had the ball for 2 more drives. Cousins went 1/4 for -7 yards.

Let's look at two of those incompletes. The first one. 1st and 10 from MN 25. The ball is hiked. Cousins passes the ball 1.64 seconds later and it's batted down by a defensive lineman in Cousins face less than a yard in front of him.

Two plays later. 3rd and 17. The ball is hiked, in less than 2 seconds the pocket is collapsing around Cousins, he fires the ball off at around 2.45 seconds while being wrapped up by a defensive lineman.

Yup, all on Cousin's inability to block and pass at the same time.

[4mnvikings82]

First off what you said in your post pretty much sums it up. If somebody disagrees with your opinion they don't know football.
We paid Cousins good money to come in here and be a winning QB...Not a 500 QB, I don't think many of us expected last season.
He's 0-10-1 against winning teams with us.

Going into Arrowhead all we needed was a decent game from Cousins. He has only threw less than 50% with the Vikings 2 times and Sunday was one of them.
12 over throws, 0-9 when under pressure and the short slide was just
Not to mention not seeing wide open receivers.
Now lucky for Cousins the loss was more on coaching than him.
A close game against a winning team and we couldn't get it done. And that loss really hurt us.

I'm going to leave it at that...

A close game against a winning team and we couldn't get it done. And that loss really hurt us.


I believe that is why everybody is down on Cousins. Because for 84 million dollars we expect him to Step Up and put the team on his shoulders in those close games like Russell Wilson. Unfortunately for us he hasn't done it yet thus lies our frustration

[Cliff]

And see in my mind it's an example of exactly my problem with Cousins. He had a good game overall and the team didn't lose because of his play. That said, after KC tied the game up the Vikings had the ball for 2 more drives. Cousins went 1/4 for -7 yards.

Let's look at two of those incompletes. The first one. 1st and 10 from MN 25. The ball is hiked. Cousins passes the ball 1.64 seconds later and it's batted down by a defensive lineman in Cousins face less than a yard in front of him.

Two plays later. 3rd and 17. The ball is hiked, in less than 2 seconds the pocket is collapsing around Cousins, he fires the ball off at around 2.45 seconds while being wrapped up by a defensive lineman.

Yup, all on Cousin's inability to block and pass at the same time.

Right. God forbid Cousins make a play in less than ideal situations. The pocket started to collapse 2 seconds after the hike? Oh no! I guess the play is over.

[The negotiator]

First off what you said in your post pretty much sums it up. If somebody disagrees with your opinion they don't know football.
We paid Cousins good money to come in here and be a winning QB...Not a 500 QB, I don't think many of us expected last season.
He's 0-10-1 against winning teams with us.

Going into Arrowhead all we needed was a decent game from Cousins. He has only threw less than 50% with the Vikings 2 times and Sunday was one of them.
12 over throws, 0-9 when under pressure and the short slide was just
Not to mention not seeing wide open receivers.
Now lucky for Cousins the loss was more on coaching than him.
A close game against a winning team and we couldn't get it done. And that loss really hurt us.

I'm going to leave it at that...

A close game against a winning team and we couldn't get it done. And that loss really hurt us.


I believe that is why everybody is down on Cousins. Because for 84 million dollars we expect him to Step Up and put the team on his shoulders in those close games like Russell Wilson. Unfortunately for us he hasn't done it yet thus lies our frustration

I keep seeing the $84M brought up. The money guarantees nothing. 28M a year is normal for a decent qb. It’s a business decision between two parties. Get over it. The game against the Chiefs was lost because of many factors. Cousins was a little off with his throws. A missed pa. The D not being able to come up with a stop at crucial times. A shanked punt.
The biggest factor in that loss was the awful play calling on the last two series. I have a hard time believing that was Stefanski. Whoever it was cost us big time. We will be lucky to make the playoffs. Our secondary is suspect. The left side of our line isn’t that good and for the most part, our receivers can’t get separation. That last one is a head scratcher for me.
That said, I hope I’m wrong and we get
on a roll. Sunday’s game is a big one.

[StumpHunter]

A close game against a winning team and we couldn't get it done. And that loss really hurt us.


I believe that is why everybody is down on Cousins. Because for 84 million dollars we expect him to Step Up and put the team on his shoulders in those close games like Russell Wilson. Unfortunately for us he hasn't done it yet thus lies our frustration

I keep seeing the $84M brought up. The money guarantees nothing. 28M a year is normal for a decent qb. It’s a business decision between two parties. Get over it. The game against the Chiefs was lost because of many factors. Cousins was a little off with his throws. A missed pa. The D not being able to come up with a stop at crucial times. A shanked punt.
The biggest factor in that loss was the awful play calling on the last two series. I have a hard time believing that was Stefanski. Whoever it was cost us big time. We will be lucky to make the playoffs. Our secondary is suspect. The left side of our line isn’t that good and for the most part, our receivers can’t get separation. That last one is a head scratcher for me.
That said, I hope I’m wrong and we get
on a roll. Sunday’s game is a big one.

In case anyone was wondering how to write the perfect Cousins apologist post, The negotiator just gave you a perfect example.

He hit on all the talking points:
1. Paying a .500 QB top 5 money is normal and there is nothing wrong with it. I mean if the Lions do it, why shouldn't we?
2. Blame the defense for not making a crucial stop needed because the offense was stagnant
3. Blame the play calling because if a play doesn't work, it is never the execution or the other team making a good play, it is always on the play call.
4. Blame the offensive line for not providing perfect protection
5. Blame the WRs for not being wide open on every play

[fiestavike]

Cousins is the QB. He touches the ball on every possession. His strengths and weaknesses have a greater impact on team success than any other single player. This is what makes QB a natural leadership position.

None of that means other factors aren't important, or that they dont impact QB performance. They obviously do.

STILL, Cousins' weaknesses are profound, and this team wont be able to win a championship with him at QB.

[Pondering Her Percy]

I think the biggest thing you're getting wrong here is that the full blame is on Cousins for losses. I don't think anybody is doing that.

The reason I think he gets the focus is because he was supposed to be the missing piece, so to speak. Instead, we've got somebody at the helm that yields the same kind of results the low-budget option we already had. On top of that, it's someone that seems unable to come through when it matters most.

Praise Kirk
-When he beats a great team

Rip Kirk
-When he beats average to weak teams (all of which are based on your discretion)
-When he loses to winning teams
-When he loses against losing teams

^^ Somebody tell me how the f*** that is a fair shot?? It's not. At all

I haven't seen anybody rip him when he beats average or weak teams. Unless people pointing out that he's been part of teams that beat average or weak teams his entire career. He can only go against who is on the schedule and I'm happy to see him beat those teams.

I wouldn't know about him getting praised when he beats a great team - has he even ever been part of a team that has beaten a great team?

As far as who is determining "average to weak". I use a combination of ESPN, NFL.com, and NBC power rankings to get a feel for how a given team is doing as I don't completely follow them all.

I do follow them all pretty close. I dont get why Philly (either year) is considered an average team. They made the playoffs, they have 90% of their SB roster still. He pis# pounded them on the road and at home. Sure, he lost to Seattle, New England, Chicago, etc. But my point is, give credit to where credit is due. Guys are trying to now say how Philly isnt a good enough team and it basically doesnt count in their eyes. Like is there a rubric for this that we have to follow. Are we only allowed to count teams that have a specific record? We can count KC, rip him for that and say they are a "good team" with a guy that wasnt in the NFL 2 months ago but try and call Philly average when they 1.) have a winning record and 2.) beat GB on the road and beat a Chicago team we got whooped by. And he didnt just beat Philly, he shredded them. That makes zero sense to me. If you're using NFL.com power rankings, they have us at #10 and Philly at #12.

I guess they dont "rip him when he beats average to weak teams" but they also give him zero credit. He's beating teams he is suppose to beat but IMO, a win is a win in the NFL. The Jets beat the Cowboys. The Browns whooped the Ravens. The Seahawks nearly lost to the 0-8 Bengals and 2-6 Bucs both at home. The Packers lost to the 4-6 Chargers. The Rams got smoked by Tampa Bay. Like no games are given to you in this league. Every win counts regardless of what a teams record is. We won 4 straight in October and Cousins has us at 6-3 right now. And we've been in every game we've played. The guy goes 8-8 last year and hated by many fans saying he cant win, he's this, he's that. Now he goes out and is winning, no just 1 game above .500 winning, ACTUALLY winning and fans still complain. I can guarantee this week if we beat Dallas, some fans will still look to find ways of saying Dallas is "average" and I'm sure the Jets loss will be in play (maybe they wont if they see I'm already calling them out for it). But if he loses.... he'll be the worst QB in the NFL. Philly was the same exact type of game. Fans found ways to say they are average when we win, but if we lost, Cousins would be again criticized for not being able to beat a "winning team". So like I said, the guy doesnt have a fair shot and didnt get one from the start by many fans.

As for him being the missing piece. Yeah he was crowned the "missing piece" of the team going into 2018. But again, that shouldnt automatically be pointed to winning a SB. This team underwhelmed last year 100%. I think he was better than some credited him for but he was very underwhelming at times. But just because we get the "missing piece" last year, doesnt mean ALL the others pieces are now allowed to fail at their job. Cousins has to do his job just as much as Xavier Rhodes, Mike Zimmer, John DeFillippo, practically any offensive lineman, Everson Griffen (non- football related but still) and so on.

Guys want to say Cousins might have been the "missing piece" but fans ignore the fact that we might have lost the most important piece of all (from an offensive standpoint) and that's Pat Shurmur. I have used the Bengals as an example before. Nobody has had more coaches robbed from them than Cincy has for a stretch. They lose Hue Jackson, Mike Zimmer, Jay Gruden, etc. Did anyone expect that defense to be as good or better after Zimmer left? No matter who they brought in as a coach or players? No. Did anyone expect Cincy's offense to continue getting better after they lost Jay Gruden then Hue Jackson?? No. They were very important pieces to their success and in turn, Cincy never recovered from losing them. Same goes for Pat Shurmur. I think our Stefanski and Kubiak are miles better than Flip was. I dont think they are at Shurmurs level, especially when the pressure is on but Flip was downright horrid. One of the worst I can think of when it comes to Vikings OCs. Just the fact that we had Dalvin Cook and Latavius Murray on this team and he couldnt figure out how to effectively utilize either of them. And guys wanted to blame the OL last year. Nope, 110% the OC. Nobody can tell me we couldnt run the ball last year with Cook and Murray 20+ times a game and not be AT LEAST in the average range of rushing offenses. And that then trickles down to less pressure being on Cousins to do everything, then that trickles down to utilizing Kirk's biggest strength in play action which then trickles down to keeping defenses on their toes and being an unpredictable play caller and that probably leads to more wins. AT LEAST enough to get us into the playoffs last year. THAT's how poor Flip was. And that's how much worse he was than Shurmur. We gained a key piece in Cousins but lost arguably the biggest piece in Shurmur. But nobody talks about that. They talk about Cousins and how HE has failed.

[VikingLord]

I keep seeing the $84M brought up. The money guarantees nothing. 28M a year is normal for a decent qb.

Yes and no. In terms of the amount of money involved, that is top-tier money for a QB. Now, Cousins can't be blamed if the Vikings evaluated him as a top-tier QB and he's not a top-tier QB, but, considering they could have just stuck with Keenum at what, $18 million per year non-guaranteed and invested that savings in players at other positions, it's not as insignificant an amount, or as inconsequential a decision, as your response implies.

Second, it's not just $28 million per year, it's $28 million per year *guaranteed*. That last bit is significant in a league where things can change quickly year-to-year, and that is a big difference between the contract of Matt Stafford and Kirk Cousins. If the Vikings wanted to cut Cousins because Brady becomes a free agent this offseason, well, that's going to be a LOT harder if they're still on the hook for Cousins regardless of whether he is on the team.

It's not as minor a point as you are making it out to be.

The game against the Chiefs was lost because of many factors. Cousins was a little off with his throws. A missed pa. The D not being able to come up with a stop at crucial times. A shanked punt.

Absolutely. I think most people on here agree, although, as with everything, the various factors have to be taken in perspective.

An analogy is the federal debt. Yeah, a lot of things contribute to the federal budget, but there are 3 or 4 areas that make up the bulk of the budget.

So it is with losses (and wins) in football, at least usually. When the Vikings were winning, Cousins was an outsized reason why, and he got the credit he deserved for the most part. When they have lost this year, I believe in every one of those games Cousins was also an outsized reason why, and he's gotten the blame he's deserved for the most part.

The biggest factor in that loss was the awful play calling on the last two series. I have a hard time believing that was Stefanski. Whoever it was cost us big time.

Stefanksi is the OC and calls the plays, so if it wasn't him calling the plays, who do you think it was? Cousins is probably the only person who could change the play pre-snap.