VikingsVictorious wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 9:03 pm
VikingLord wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 7:56 pm
I wouldn't sign a franchise QB to what amounts to a 2 year contract.
And with that said, I would trade Cousins if the offer were good enough. He's a good QB. He's competent. You can win with him if you build a solid team around him. But he's not a franchise QB. There are better QBs out there.
The term franchise QB has no true meaning. I've asked people to define it and nobody really can.
How about this:
A franchise QB is a QB who once acquired by a team would not be traded nor released by said team. A franchise QB is considered an irreplaceable player for his team and plays at a consistently high level. He is a QB with few obvious weaknesses, if any obvious weaknesses, and who has several notable strengths for which most defenses cannot fully account.
It isn't about the money the QB makes per se - it's more about the willingness of the team for which the QB plays to commit to the QB. A team that has a franchise QB is obvious - they are completely content with the play of the QB and the future prospects of the QB and often structure their offseason in ways that attempt to maximize the QB's strengths heading into the next season.
Another indicator of a franchise QB is the way the team plays offense. Teams with a franchise QB feature that QB's strengths. Such teams still want effective running games and often need them, but they rarely *feature* them, and almost never run to the extent the QB's contribution is minimized (ala what the 49ers did in the playoffs with Jimmy G. last year). The franchise QB is *the* primary weapon of the offense. He is the first order concern even if the offense has a dynamic or powerful running game (be that via a primary RB or a stable of RBs). He is the single player on the offense that everyone knows that offense will rely on to win a close game at the end. He demands the ball in such situations and delivers more often than not. He is generally known as a clutch player with the game on the line. Franchise QBs often make a long list of WRs look good and not the other way around.
So there might not be a simple definition, but I can safely say that for me, Kirk Cousins is not, never has been, and probably never will be a franchise QB. He's a complementary player. He is skilled. He can make big plays and even win games on the strength of his play. He's just not nearly consistent enough doing it, doesn't do it nearly enough under pressure, and even after getting paid top dollar by the Vikings, has not had the offense constructed around his skills.
Cousins is not the only highly paid QB who isn't a franchise QB. There are other examples of similar QBs, and similar QBs play for teams that are competitive for Superbowls. The Vikings can win with Cousins. He's just not going to be the primary reason they will be one of those teams if they become one. More than likely if they do end up competing for a Superbowl while Cousins is the starting QB they'll do so similar to how the 49ers did it with Jimmy G. - on the strength of a consistent running game and dominant defense that puts Cousins into situations that are very favorable to him.
