Answering everyone’s Cousins questions

[VikingLord]

I defend him when I don’t think he’s getting a fair shot. I don’t think he’s gotten a fair shot from the start.

Why do you think he deserves a fair shot?

He took the deal that pays him $84 million guaranteed. He stepped up to the mantle on a team that finished the prior season 13-3 and lost in the NFC Championship Game and accepted everything that goes along with that deal, including all the expectations, fair or otherwise.

There are first round draft picks in the league that have gotten less of a "fair shot" than Cousins has gotten during his time in Minnesota. They come in to the league as rookies, usually playing for terrible teams, with huge focus and expectations for them to be the difference and turn the team around. Some actually manage to do that, or at least be at the forefront of the transformation. Cousins, who is a vet who took big money and a guaranteed contract, came in and his team went backwards. Not all his fault, but who really cares what percentage of it was him and what percentage was something else? The team went backwards, and when that happens in a situation like the one Cousins inserted himself into, he's going to take heat.

For the most part he's fully earned the criticisms of his play even barring the "fairness" aspect of things, IMHO, but if that is the reason you're defending him, you should fully understand the reason that doesn't fly with most fans.

And anyone that thinks he was just suppose to walk in here after a 13-3 season on a new team with a new scheme and just take us to the SB year 1, you don’t know football. And if you think Keenum could have done anything close to what he did in 2017 here, you don’t know football.

What would you have said about a 3rd string journeyman QB taking over the starting job early in the season getting his team to 13-3 and the NFC Championship game?

Probably someone thinking that could happen doesn't know football.

We don't know what Keenum could have done had he stayed. We do know what the Vikings overall could have done, though, by having more resources to direct to improving other areas of the team.

And what I mean by this is having a TEAM around him that is also doing their jobs when called upon. Coaches included. Granted that’s not always going to happen and he needs to overcome it when duty calls (which he has at times this year). But when guys aren’t giving him a fair shot from the start, already have their opinions set when he was in Washington or after week 3 of last year and want to blame him every time we lose, I’m going to defend him. When he plays bad I do and will admit it. But even when he plays bad, if the OL or defense or coaching was just as bad, I’m going to bring it up. Nobody has been given less of a chance at a team by fans than Kirk cousins. Ever, that I have seen and I don’t agree with it. If you don’t agree, sorry but that’s how I feel and that’s a big reason I defend him.

I really don't think you read most of the criticisms after a game then, because rarely do I see Cousins being singled out. When his errors are glaring, as they were against the Packers, I see more of that, but even in that game he wasn't singled out as the defense sucked as well.

I still don't understand your seeming blanket defense of Cousins. Based on what you're saying here, Cousins has a bad rep because the fans here never gave him a chance. I just don't agree. A lot of us, myself included, were excited when Spielman went out there and got Cousins. The guy can play. He's got the physical abilities you want in a QB. He can make all the throws.

But that isn't enough to be truly successful in the pros. There is a mental and leadership aspect to overall success as well, and I'd argue that Cousins is deficient in both. Just witness his yard-short slide against KC last week as an example of the mental aspect. He should know where the line to gain is pre-snap. This is all he does. He should know that on any given drop back he might have to bail and run for it. This is all the guy friggin does for a living. Scrambling and sliding short of the marker makes zero sense. There is literally no point to him doing that where they were on the field. Better to stay behind the LOS as long as possible and hope someone comes open or throw it away.

On the leadership front, Cousins is a nice guy. I just don't know that he inspires a lot of confidence in his teammates. I think it's good that he apologized to Stefon Diggs for not getting him the ball, but then against KC, he gets it to him 1 time with several deep overthrows mixed in. So after all that hulabaloo after the loss at the Bears where Diggs similarly was overthrown and not targeted much, and all the public airing of that, Cousins and Diggs are back to the same place against KC?

Is that all on Cousins? Probably not, but you have to wonder why he wouldn't give Diggs more chances. My theory is he's too risk-averse because KC focused on Diggs with Thielen out, but still, if he trusts Diggs why not give him some chances?

Bottom line for me is, Cousins made himself a high profile part of a team with high expectations, and when you take that seat, you're going to be an easy and obvious target for the peanut gallery when things don't go well.

[halfgiz]

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...

[VikeFanInEagleLand]

I don't think this has anything to do with you feeling Cousins is being treated unfairly, and everything to do with you not wanting to be wrong.

And this is what kills me with you....who wants to be wrong about something? But you can ask anyone on this board about me when it comes to being wrong about a player. If they end up busting (after they are given TIME), I have no problem admitting it. I did it with Treadwell, I did it with Ponder, etc. I'm not going to sit here and tell you Cousins was great last year. But he certainly wasnt bad and there was plenty of things that had a play in that 8-7-1 record. But the difference between me and some fans on here is that I will give guys TIME. I'm not going to call Trae Waynes a bust year 1, or hell even year 2 for that matter. Use to battle with PurpleKoolaid until the sun rose about Waynes. Same with Treadwell. I use to argue with Demi when he was calling Joseph and Munnerlyn bust FA signings year one. Neither played great but both were key pieces come year 2. Hell Joseph is still here and playing at a high level. Whether they are a rookie or a veteran it doesnt matter. Cris Carter said it best, you dont just come into a new team, new scheme, etc and just pick up where you left off a year ago. It just doesnt work that way. That is unrealistic. But many fans CANT get past that. They look at the surface of things and say, we were 13-3 in 2017 how are we not as good now? Because every year is a new year. Your schedule only gets tougher after going 13-3. Your coaches change when you have good years like that. New players come in. Some players leave. Hell look at the Eagles. Barely squeaked into the playoffs last year (simply because we blew the game vs Chicago) after winning a SB. What changed on their team? Hmmm well they lost their OC to a HC job (just like we did), they lost Flip (who only did so much being a QB coach) and swapped some players here and there. They didnt even go through a drastic QB change. It was Foles and Wentz just like it has been. And they go 9-7 and were out of the playoffs if we win week 17. Or hell, even made a FG in OT vs the Packers. That's a team that won the damn SB and took the Patriots of all teams to the cleaners. They had less change than we had and had a 9-7 season.

#1 You see people having Cousins as part of the problem in a list of problems in a loss as people putting 100% of the blame on Cousins. That is on you, not us.

Oh no. Like I mentioned in my original post, there are others that have discussed non-Cousins issues. But you of all people are going to sit here and tell me that the majority of the talk and criticism hasnt been directed at Kirk Cousins? Each loss we've had the last two years, the majority of the criticism hasnt been directed at Kirk Cousins?? I havent seen many "lists" of problems. I've seen many Kirk Cousins problems. And the leader of that pack has been you. Yeah guys are concerned about the D, concerned about the OL, concerned about the coaches. But please, go find me a thread on here that doesnt mention Cousins name at all that's more than a page or two long.... We could have a thread on here titled "Vikings waterboy" and someone along the way is going to mention Cousins one way or another. The majority of the blame, the majority of the finger pointing, the majority of the complaining is not over Xavier Rhodes, or Pat Elflein, or Kevin Stefanski, it's over Kirk Cousins. You know that and I know that.

#2 Cousins is held to a higher standard than recent QBs because he is in his 5th year starting and making top 5 money. That is very different than a 2nd year QB and a backup making 1.5 million, and we expect more from him. I do not understand why you don't.

It doesnt matter whether he is a 5th year or a 1st year. It's a new team, new scheme, new players, etc. That isnt something you just walk into and are a super star. How often in the NFL have we seen stud players go to new teams and flop?? Leveon Bell, Odell Beckham, Ndamukong Suh, Stephon Gilmore, etc. It happens all the time. You dont just walk into a new team and everything is the same. No less at the QB position. Sure it happens but there are many times it doesnt as well. As for the money aspect, I dont care what he is making. Last year the top 6 highest paid QBs missed the playoffs. Aaron Rodgers went 6-9-1 last year. What was their excuse? Nothing to do with Aaron Rodgers and how he was playing? Or is he allowed to lose because he won a SB 9 years ago? It must mean all 6 fan bases were upset with their QBs last year and were blaming their QBs as to why they didnt make the playoffs. I guess that's how it worked. Funny that I didnt hear near the criticism Cousins took for any of those other QBs. Hmm...

#3 There was a big difference between Flip and Shurmur. A valid excuse for a drop-off on offense, but a big upgrade at QB should have more than made up for it.

Again, the NFL just DOESNT WORK THAT WAY. Just because you "upgrade" a position doesnt translate to you "upgrading" your record from the previous year. Year after year teams are upgrading their rosters. And year after year teams have worse years than the did the year prior. That is reality. You have sunk right into the same mindset of the...I call them, "highlight fans" (fans that have a "favorite team" but could tell you nothing about them, the players, coaches, etc and base their opinions off what the media and highlights show). Now I am NOT saying you are one of these fans because clearly you actually watch Vikings games and know a lot about the team. But you do have a similar mindset that's for sure. Basing everything off record, looking at the surface of things and mainly thinking that since we "upgraded" our QB that means we should automatically "upgrade" our record. It just doesnt work that way. That is usually the "attempt" but never is it that easy to change one player and surround that player with completely new players, schemes, etc and think it's going to win you a SB. It takes time, it takes a team, it takes staying healthy, it takes (at times) catching a good schedule, it takes excellent coaching on all sides of the ball, it takes excellent play calling and game planning, it takes the majority of the players doing their job day in and day out, hell sometimes (in Keenums situation) it takes a whole lot of luck, etc. Kirk Cousins is just a small, little piece of what a team needs to win it all. Whether you were 0-16 or 16-0 the year before that doesnt matter. Everyone is still required to do their job and do it at a high level. Because once you upgrade one position, another position could just as easily falter and that includes coaches, players, etc. Nothing is guaranteed. It's not like having an empty wallet, working and then getting handed $1,000...a guaranteed upgrade. Everything is still a crap shoot until everyone doesnt their job at a high level and executes at a high level. Period.

#4 The 4 games he won were against 2 of the worst teams in the NFL and 2 very average teams. All 4 had bad defenses. They are the type of games he typically wins. That helps his team get to the playoffs, but what about when we get there?

Ughhh this drives me insane! Guys say "he needs to win" or "he needs to win a big game". The biggest problem here is that people want to count it when he loses a big game but not count it when he wins a big game. They also like to decide what they think is a "big game" and not a big game. You in particular.

I dont care what anyone says that Detroit game was just as big as any of them. It's a divisional game. They were 2-2-1 going into that game with us. They lost 2 games by a total of 5 points. They had KC beat WITH Mahomes. Had GB beat. They could have easily been undefeated when it was our turn to play them.

How is the KC game any bigger than the Philly game?? How is the KC game "him losing a big game" but Philly not him winning a big game? Now all of the sudden Philly is a "very average team"?? Dude give me a break. No less the Eagles dont have a "bad defense". The pass defense might not be great but overall they still have a good defense. This is where you turn into the one that doesnt want to be wrong. The Eagles have beat the Packers on the road, whooped a solid Bills team and just handled a Chicago team we got worked by. AND they are a winning team. But thats not a "big game" because you dont want it to be. If anything the Philly game was more important because they are in our conference and will be in the playoff hunt.

But what kills me, is that if we LOST to Philly.....that game would 110% get brought up when fans talked about him "not beating a winning team" or a "winning a big game". I can also 110% guarantee that if we did indeed BEAT KC, you would be sitting on here saying "well they didnt have Mahomes, they have a bad defense (like you said above about Philly), they are an average at best team without Mahomes" and so on. And to top it off, I'll even jump ahead to this week. Because I know that if we beat Dallas you'll go down the line of them being average and how they lost to the Jets and that it's not a "big game or good team". You make that decision of what is and what isnt a big game based off what Kirk does which is an absolute joke. This is where I say again, this is Kirk not getting a fair shot. Whose to sit there and say, "yup KC was a big game and he didnt win but Philly wasnt a big game they are just average". Like, what? Dont even bother trying to defend it. You're flat out wrong. No other way around it. You're going to keep putting down every team he beats with any stupid little stat you can find saying they arent a "good team" but the second he loses one, no matter who it is, you're all over it. And another way he gets an unfair shot, his fricken wins arent even counting with some fans now. This is how he is currently judged by you....and others:

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

He just needs to win. That shuts everyone up. Your excuses for him will never do that, but winning will.

That's literally what he's doing!!! He's 6-3, and not a soul has shut up. Come on you know all about looking at records....if a QB is 6-3 this year are they not winning? Oh right, he's winning but not beating teams that are up to your standards. So I guess that means he's....not winning?

A win is a win and we currently have 6 of them. I dont care who we beat. Should we not count Tom Brady's wins this year because he's had the easiest schedule you could ask for and beat several BAD teams? No. Nobody is going to shut up when Cousins wins because you along with others are going to find excuses as to why any win he has isnt good enough and every loss he has ruins our season. Your hatred runs so deep for him that you've brought yourself to the point where you're defending a bad OL, defending a defense that has dropped off quite a bit from 2017, defending poor coaching, defending KC (w/ Moore) to dogging Philly, to defending Oaklands D line. A.n.y.t.h.i.n.g. you can to make Cousins look bad. It has became an obsession that you're so far invested in that there is no escaping. It is what it is. But it's sad that some fans go SO FAR with it that it causes others to question your knowledge of the game. All because....you dont want to be wrong.

I wish you could use all the material you use to defend Cousins when you analyze Keenum. A new team in 2018, another new team in 2019, new schemes and much worse teams than the Vikings....his record with the Vikings in 2017, in your own words : A win is a win", etc. It's weird how many of the same arguments you defend against with Cousins are the same ones you use to criticize Keenum ( and Bridgewater)

[Tark]

Addressing anyone that’s quoted me in the last few threads so I hopefully don’t have to repeat myself 100 more times:

Why do I defend Kirk Cousins? There are multiple reasons. But I will say I defend cousins when guys stray away from the team and hone in on cousins and how HE lost us the game. Here are a few points I wanted to address:

#1: I think nobody has ever gotten a more unfair shot to be successful than cousins- Literally EVERY loss we’ve had since he’s been here has been put on his shoulders. The talk has been HIM. The OL is brought up here and there, the defense here and there, the coaches here and there but mainly cousins. Granted he’s the QB and everyone is obsessed with the contract. Guys think that when I defend cousins after a loss, I’m saying he played good (which some games he did) but many, many times I have said yeah he didn’t play good. But I’m also one of the only ones that look at ALL the aspects of the game that went wrong, NOT just cousins. Others do anything they can to defend the defense, coaches, OL, etc just to prove cousins is the one at fault. If I’m sitting here saying “nope cousins always plays good it’s everyone else’s fault” then please come at me because I am wrong. But never have I done that. This all started last year in week 3. Week 1 we won, week 2 we tied and cousins made a big time throw to get us that tie and bring us back from a big deficit. But when week 3 hit against Buffalo is when it all started. Did he play good, not one bit. Was there multiple reasons we went down 17-0 after 4 offensive plays? Yes. I was at that game. Partly because of cousins, partly because Reiff was getting smoked by jerry Hughes within seconds, partly because linval Joseph got a roughing the passer on the first drive on 3rd down, partly because Flip was flip and we became one dimensional when we’re down and ran the ball 2 times all game with Murray, partly because I think the team was distracted with what happened the day before with Griff. ALL 100% fair assessments. But MANY got down on cousins after 3 weeks of being a Viking mainly because of how the bills game went following a 13-3 season and also given that cousins was a .500 QB in Washington.

#2: The past Viking QBs and cousins past- An unfair reasoning here as well. If teddy bridgewater had an identical game as cousins vs KC this week and the results were the same, I can just about guarantee not many fans would be on here blaming teddy for the loss or complaining about teddy and saying he didn’t play good enough. Why is that? And don’t bother defending it because the teddy supporters out there know that’s how it would be. Hell guys still defend teddy for his two below average years that only had success because of AP. Nobody wants to talk about the two games he crapped the bed on and took a sack fumble UNDER PRESSURE.

Or case Keenum. I explain that look how he was prior to 2017. Look how he’s been in 2018 and 2019. And the excuses are “well Washington sucks” or “Denver sucked” (which they didn’t). There was plenty of talent on Denver last year where Keenum could have succeeded. Well did Washington not suck when cousins was there? Was there defense not terrible? Did they ever have a RB worth a damn? Was their organization not dysfunctional like it’s always been? So my question is, why does it apply to cousins and his past counts but when you guys want to talk Keenum or teddy, there past doesn’t count. Or what case is doing now doesn’t count? It does and it should. So why bring those guys up if we aren’t going to look at both sides of the paper?

#3: Last year- the difference between flip and shurmur is astronomical if you ask me. Now that we see what kind of RB we have in cook (even though we already knew), how Flip failed and avoided using him last year and putting all the weight on cousins shoulders. How flip never adjusted to anything. Yet you see him now in Jacksonville and he’s running Fournette like crazy and he’s a top rusher in the nfl. Did he need to be fired to realize he wasn’t calling plays how he should have? I’m not saying cousins played well non stop last year. He didn’t at all. But this is another look at EVERYTHING and not just cousins.

#4: This year- Cousins just won 4 straight games. 3 of them where he was literally a top 3 QB in the nfl. I don’t care who we played. They weren’t great teams but they definitely weren’t bad ones. Especially Philly. Again, cousins has had his bad games this year but that also came with bad play in other areas as well. Chicago being the worst. But again, sacked multiple times, the defense not being able to get chase Daniel off the field, etc. Cousins responded exceptionally well to those games. Better than many could possibly ask for. This game against KC again wasn’t NOT cousins fault due to his inaccuracies but there were much bigger problems during that game. Either way, Kirk cousins is still playing pretty darn good football. He has this team in position to make a run. But when guys want to look mainly at cousins any time we lose in extremely unfair if you ask me. Kirk cousins isn’t the only guy that ever needs to “step up”. Other players and coaches do just as much. I listened to his podcast regarding the KC game. He mentioned how multiple passes during that game were 2nd, 3rd and even 4th reads that turned into a successful play. And that’s what guys don’t see. They want to look at every pass play and try to find any random guy open they can and say “Kirk can’t see the field”. If you go on YouTube and type in “Aaron Rodgers missed throws”, you’ll find this: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RT_zWoVRPIw&t=106s Hundreds of throws where he has guys WIDE OPEN and overthrows them or completely misses them. I’m not comparing Rodgers to cousins but to sit there and pick apart cousins literally being a half inch off stefon diggs hands vs KC is pushing it. Or when you watch film and say “yup Thielen is wide open and cousins didn’t even look at him”. Do you guys realize how often that happens every game to even the best QBs. Rodgers is the “best in the game” and there are hundreds of throws where he did the same damn thing. So nitpicking a film trying to act like you know anything at all about being a QB and knowing what it takes to see the field, is downright laughable.


Final thoughts-In the end, I don’t defend cousins because I have a “man crush” on him. I don’t defend cousins because I think he does no wrong. I don’t defend cousins just because he’s the QB of the Vikings now. I defend him when I don’t think he’s getting a fair shot. I don’t think he’s gotten a fair shot from the start. And anyone that thinks he was just suppose to walk in here after a 13-3 season on a new team with a new scheme and just take us to the SB year 1, you don’t know football. And if you think Keenum could have done anything close to what he did in 2017 here, you don’t know football. Kirk cousins is a good QB. He has his flaws just like anyone else but I do think he has what it takes under the right circumstances And what I mean by this is having a TEAM around him that is also doing their jobs when called upon. Coaches included. Granted that’s not always going to happen and he needs to overcome it when duty calls (which he has at times this year). But when guys aren’t giving him a fair shot from the start, already have their opinions set when he was in Washington or after week 3 of last year and want to blame him every time we lose, I’m going to defend him. When he plays bad I do and will admit it. But even when he plays bad, if the OL or defense or coaching was just as bad, I’m going to bring it up. Nobody has been given less of a chance at a team by fans than Kirk cousins. Ever, that I have seen and I don’t agree with it. If you don’t agree, sorry but that’s how I feel and that’s a big reason I defend him.

Granted, I certainly don't have the time to read your manifesto, but here it is for me: Wins and Losses, Playoff wins and SB wins. Don't much care for stats other than those.

[Pondering Her Percy]

First off what you said in your post pretty much sums it up. If somebody disagrees with your opinion they don't know football.

Wow clearly you missed the point of that post..... So because I said this....

And anyone that thinks he was just suppose to walk in here after a 13-3 season on a new team with a new scheme and just take us to the SB year 1, you don’t know football. And if you think Keenum could have done anything close to what he did in 2017 here, you don’t know football.

That means anyone that disagrees with my opinion doesnt know football?? lol really? Clearly you thought he should have taken us to the SB year 1 then? You thought that was realistic? New scheme, new players, new everything and just pick up and onto the SB right?

And as for Keenum, um does anyone think he would have repeated that 2017 success under pass happy flip no less??.........................(crickets)............

He's 0-10-1 against winning teams with us.

Not that his record is great vs. "winning teams" but also I have no idea where you got that stat?? You have the GB tie in there...who was not a winning team last year but you arent counting the GB win? Philly was a winning team last year. Philly is also a winning team this year. That stat is all sorts of messed up.

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...

Ok so what is decent if that performance wasnt decent? If a QB throws 3 TDs (in non-garbage time) AND was accurate, that usually means you played very good 98% of the time. Cousins threw 3 big TDs but wasnt very accurate. I would say that's decent. You just said that's all we needed from him. Not sure what you think a decent game is.

And as for the 3 TDs, some think that is how I'm evaluating his performance. But that couldnt be more false. Those 3 TDs were ALL 3rd down TD passes to take the lead each time. That's not just good on his part, that's great. The inaccuracies were not good. Some I let go like the finger tip one by Diggs given the wind and how close it really was. The short passes at players feet and behind them was unacceptable. When you weigh the good vs the bad, it falls right in the average range if you ask me.

As for the "not seeing open WRs", I've addressed this in my original post. Sitting as a fan and having no clue what the play call is, who the reads are, etc you really have no idea. I 110% guarantee you I can go back to Aaron Rodgers film, Russell Wilsons, Pat Mahomes, etc. and find open WRs they missed. People hunt for it now because of the media and fans that have blown it out of proportion. I posted the video of Rodgers above proving how often that happens

And you said "that loss really hurt us".....did it? Because losses to AFC teams, if anything are the losses you want. The important ones are obviously divisional games but also conference games, especially teams like Philly that we will be in the playoff hunt with and now have a leg up on them. The loss didnt hurt us as much as you think it did.

[Tark]

Yes, I'm repeating myself due to pre dementia: I certainly don't have the time to read any of your manifestos, but here it is for me: Wins and Losses, Playoff wins and SB wins. Don't much care for stats other than those. SKOL, Baby.

[J. Kapp 11]

He's 0-10-1 against winning teams with us.

As everyone knows, I can't let misquoted stats go unchecked.

That 0-10-1 is Cousins' record with the Vikings when trailing in the fourth quarter (no matter the opponents' record). Not his record against winning teams.

Of course, that's not a stat to write home about, either. But it's the wrong stat for the comment.

Sorry. I can't help myself.

[S197]

I think the issue is that this isn’t a binary question. There’s more implications to Cousins than just whether or not he’s a good or bad QB. His $84 million contract means we sacrifice elsewhere. Matt Stafford is a good example, he’s an above average QB but the amount of capital spent on him drains resources from the rest of the team. Cousins has the same issue, he’s okay but he’s not good enough. Yes, he had 3 TD’s but he also didn’t step up in key situations. The TEAM didn’t step up as a whole but you can’t ignore the albatross of a contract that’s a huge factor.

Look at Matt Moore, the guy is a backup but he hit 71% of his passes and had a 104 QB rating. Did Cousins look immensely better than Moore? There’s no way. And therein lies the problem. You can’t make elite money and play average to above average and not expect to take heat. Cousins in a vacuum is pretty decent but you can’t look at it that way, the resources allocated to him means he needs to win IN SPITE of poor OL play, etc. Rodgers had a ridiculous TD throw against the Chiefs. He was getting tackled and still managed to place a perfect ball in the back of the end zone. Now I’m not saying Cousins needs to be as good as Rodgers but he needs to be able to do those types of things once in a while. You see that throw and you say to yourself “holy #### that was amazing.” I cant recall a single Cousins play of anywhere near that magnitude. Ever. He’s not the type of player that’s going to make plays when he shouldn’t. He’ll make them when conditions are ideal but there’s never any “holy ####” he just carried this team on his back moments.

Tl;dr — Cousins is vanilla ice cream. I like vanilla ice cream. It’s not flashy or anything but I think it’s pretty good. But I’ll be damned if I pay $50 for a scoop.

[Raptorman]

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.

[Pondering Her Percy]

He's 0-10-1 against winning teams with us.

As everyone knows, I can't let misquoted stats go unchecked.

That 0-10-1 is Cousins' record with the Vikings when trailing in the fourth quarter (no matter the opponents' record). Not his record against winning teams.

Of course, that's not a stat to write home about, either. But it's the wrong stat for the comment.

Sorry. I can't help myself.

Yeah I just heard that on my way home on a podcast I listen to. And again, how reliable is a stat like that? It almost sounds like it has the intention of making it sound worse than it really is just to hype up the “Cousins can’t win a big game” argument. Simply in the sense of, for example, the buffalo game last year. We went into the 4th quarter down 27-0. If he came back from that he’d be a hero. Clearly he didn’t play well early on but that’s beside the point. There were definitely some games where a win was still reachable 100%. But I’m sure when you look across the league, any team that’s down by multiple scores going into the 4th quarter, their QBs record is terrible. Again, not saying all were like that but there were definitely some. So I don’t put a lot of weight into hunted “on the surface” stats like that

[Pondering Her Percy]

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.

Lol touché my friend, touché

[Pondering Her Percy]

And this is what kills me with you....who wants to be wrong about something? But you can ask anyone on this board about me when it comes to being wrong about a player. If they end up busting (after they are given TIME), I have no problem admitting it. I did it with Treadwell, I did it with Ponder, etc. I'm not going to sit here and tell you Cousins was great last year. But he certainly wasnt bad and there was plenty of things that had a play in that 8-7-1 record. But the difference between me and some fans on here is that I will give guys TIME. I'm not going to call Trae Waynes a bust year 1, or hell even year 2 for that matter. Use to battle with PurpleKoolaid until the sun rose about Waynes. Same with Treadwell. I use to argue with Demi when he was calling Joseph and Munnerlyn bust FA signings year one. Neither played great but both were key pieces come year 2. Hell Joseph is still here and playing at a high level. Whether they are a rookie or a veteran it doesnt matter. Cris Carter said it best, you dont just come into a new team, new scheme, etc and just pick up where you left off a year ago. It just doesnt work that way. That is unrealistic. But many fans CANT get past that. They look at the surface of things and say, we were 13-3 in 2017 how are we not as good now? Because every year is a new year. Your schedule only gets tougher after going 13-3. Your coaches change when you have good years like that. New players come in. Some players leave. Hell look at the Eagles. Barely squeaked into the playoffs last year (simply because we blew the game vs Chicago) after winning a SB. What changed on their team? Hmmm well they lost their OC to a HC job (just like we did), they lost Flip (who only did so much being a QB coach) and swapped some players here and there. They didnt even go through a drastic QB change. It was Foles and Wentz just like it has been. And they go 9-7 and were out of the playoffs if we win week 17. Or hell, even made a FG in OT vs the Packers. That's a team that won the damn SB and took the Patriots of all teams to the cleaners. They had less change than we had and had a 9-7 season.




Oh no. Like I mentioned in my original post, there are others that have discussed non-Cousins issues. But you of all people are going to sit here and tell me that the majority of the talk and criticism hasnt been directed at Kirk Cousins? Each loss we've had the last two years, the majority of the criticism hasnt been directed at Kirk Cousins?? I havent seen many "lists" of problems. I've seen many Kirk Cousins problems. And the leader of that pack has been you. Yeah guys are concerned about the D, concerned about the OL, concerned about the coaches. But please, go find me a thread on here that doesnt mention Cousins name at all that's more than a page or two long.... We could have a thread on here titled "Vikings waterboy" and someone along the way is going to mention Cousins one way or another. The majority of the blame, the majority of the finger pointing, the majority of the complaining is not over Xavier Rhodes, or Pat Elflein, or Kevin Stefanski, it's over Kirk Cousins. You know that and I know that.



It doesnt matter whether he is a 5th year or a 1st year. It's a new team, new scheme, new players, etc. That isnt something you just walk into and are a super star. How often in the NFL have we seen stud players go to new teams and flop?? Leveon Bell, Odell Beckham, Ndamukong Suh, Stephon Gilmore, etc. It happens all the time. You dont just walk into a new team and everything is the same. No less at the QB position. Sure it happens but there are many times it doesnt as well. As for the money aspect, I dont care what he is making. Last year the top 6 highest paid QBs missed the playoffs. Aaron Rodgers went 6-9-1 last year. What was their excuse? Nothing to do with Aaron Rodgers and how he was playing? Or is he allowed to lose because he won a SB 9 years ago? It must mean all 6 fan bases were upset with their QBs last year and were blaming their QBs as to why they didnt make the playoffs. I guess that's how it worked. Funny that I didnt hear near the criticism Cousins took for any of those other QBs. Hmm...



Again, the NFL just DOESNT WORK THAT WAY. Just because you "upgrade" a position doesnt translate to you "upgrading" your record from the previous year. Year after year teams are upgrading their rosters. And year after year teams have worse years than the did the year prior. That is reality. You have sunk right into the same mindset of the...I call them, "highlight fans" (fans that have a "favorite team" but could tell you nothing about them, the players, coaches, etc and base their opinions off what the media and highlights show). Now I am NOT saying you are one of these fans because clearly you actually watch Vikings games and know a lot about the team. But you do have a similar mindset that's for sure. Basing everything off record, looking at the surface of things and mainly thinking that since we "upgraded" our QB that means we should automatically "upgrade" our record. It just doesnt work that way. That is usually the "attempt" but never is it that easy to change one player and surround that player with completely new players, schemes, etc and think it's going to win you a SB. It takes time, it takes a team, it takes staying healthy, it takes (at times) catching a good schedule, it takes excellent coaching on all sides of the ball, it takes excellent play calling and game planning, it takes the majority of the players doing their job day in and day out, hell sometimes (in Keenums situation) it takes a whole lot of luck, etc. Kirk Cousins is just a small, little piece of what a team needs to win it all. Whether you were 0-16 or 16-0 the year before that doesnt matter. Everyone is still required to do their job and do it at a high level. Because once you upgrade one position, another position could just as easily falter and that includes coaches, players, etc. Nothing is guaranteed. It's not like having an empty wallet, working and then getting handed $1,000...a guaranteed upgrade. Everything is still a crap shoot until everyone doesnt their job at a high level and executes at a high level. Period.



Ughhh this drives me insane! Guys say "he needs to win" or "he needs to win a big game". The biggest problem here is that people want to count it when he loses a big game but not count it when he wins a big game. They also like to decide what they think is a "big game" and not a big game. You in particular.

I dont care what anyone says that Detroit game was just as big as any of them. It's a divisional game. They were 2-2-1 going into that game with us. They lost 2 games by a total of 5 points. They had KC beat WITH Mahomes. Had GB beat. They could have easily been undefeated when it was our turn to play them.

How is the KC game any bigger than the Philly game?? How is the KC game "him losing a big game" but Philly not him winning a big game? Now all of the sudden Philly is a "very average team"?? Dude give me a break. No less the Eagles dont have a "bad defense". The pass defense might not be great but overall they still have a good defense. This is where you turn into the one that doesnt want to be wrong. The Eagles have beat the Packers on the road, whooped a solid Bills team and just handled a Chicago team we got worked by. AND they are a winning team. But thats not a "big game" because you dont want it to be. If anything the Philly game was more important because they are in our conference and will be in the playoff hunt.

But what kills me, is that if we LOST to Philly.....that game would 110% get brought up when fans talked about him "not beating a winning team" or a "winning a big game". I can also 110% guarantee that if we did indeed BEAT KC, you would be sitting on here saying "well they didnt have Mahomes, they have a bad defense (like you said above about Philly), they are an average at best team without Mahomes" and so on. And to top it off, I'll even jump ahead to this week. Because I know that if we beat Dallas you'll go down the line of them being average and how they lost to the Jets and that it's not a "big game or good team". You make that decision of what is and what isnt a big game based off what Kirk does which is an absolute joke. This is where I say again, this is Kirk not getting a fair shot. Whose to sit there and say, "yup KC was a big game and he didnt win but Philly wasnt a big game they are just average". Like, what? Dont even bother trying to defend it. You're flat out wrong. No other way around it. You're going to keep putting down every team he beats with any stupid little stat you can find saying they arent a "good team" but the second he loses one, no matter who it is, you're all over it. And another way he gets an unfair shot, his fricken wins arent even counting with some fans now. This is how he is currently judged by you....and others:

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




That's literally what he's doing!!! He's 6-3, and not a soul has shut up. Come on you know all about looking at records....if a QB is 6-3 this year are they not winning? Oh right, he's winning but not beating teams that are up to your standards. So I guess that means he's....not winning?

A win is a win and we currently have 6 of them. I dont care who we beat. Should we not count Tom Brady's wins this year because he's had the easiest schedule you could ask for and beat several BAD teams? No. Nobody is going to shut up when Cousins wins because you along with others are going to find excuses as to why any win he has isnt good enough and every loss he has ruins our season. Your hatred runs so deep for him that you've brought yourself to the point where you're defending a bad OL, defending a defense that has dropped off quite a bit from 2017, defending poor coaching, defending KC (w/ Moore) to dogging Philly, to defending Oaklands D line. A.n.y.t.h.i.n.g. you can to make Cousins look bad. It has became an obsession that you're so far invested in that there is no escaping. It is what it is. But it's sad that some fans go SO FAR with it that it causes others to question your knowledge of the game. All because....you dont want to be wrong.

I wish you could use all the material you use to defend Cousins when you analyze Keenum. A new team in 2018, another new team in 2019, new schemes and much worse teams than the Vikings....his record with the Vikings in 2017, in your own words : A win is a win", etc. It's weird how many of the same arguments you defend against with Cousins are the same ones you use to criticize Keenum ( and Bridgewater)

Washington was 100% much worse than the Vikings. The broncos had Lindsey, demaryius Thomas, Emmanuel Sanders and courtland Sutton up until week 9 that year. They also had a middling defense. They were definitely worse than the Vikings but they were far from a bad roster.

And sure, new scheme, new roster, etc. But Keenum would have had a new scheme regardless of where he went or if he stayed because shurmur left. And I don’t know how anyone can tell me that 2018 Keenum would be even remotely close to 2017 Keenum in a pass happy offense that put the game on his shoulders like flips. But either way, this is a career thing for Keenum. Not just a year or two. He’s been bad his entire career outside of 2017. Cousins hasn’t. Some might say so because they want to judge his record on a bad Washington team. But cousins showed he could play and was pretty consistent over that time. His defense in Washington on the other hand in his 4 years starting there was 20th, 28th, 28th and 21st in total defense during that span. And his run offense was 19th, 20, 21st and 28th. So how much help did cousins really have in Washington? My whole thing with Keenum vs cousins was consistency vs inconsistency.

As for teddy, I already proved how poor teddy was those first two years. Especially in 2015 when AP and the defense carried the team. Go look at what happened in 2015 when AP had games under 100 yards. It was awful and we lost. Teddy couldn’t pull through when AP struggled. Look at what happened when AP went over 100 yards. We usually won. Guys credit teddy for winning the division? AP and the defense won the division. Hell, in the GB game to win the division, teddy threw for a pathetic 99 yards. 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. Teddy did very little when he was here but is praised for whatever reason. I can’t look at teddy’s season and say to myself, yeah he was a winner in 2015. I just can’t. Because he really wasn’t. His ceiling was a game manager at the time.

[halfgiz]

@christomasson
12h
#Vikings Kirk Cousins is now really indeed a ".500 quarterback.'' His career record as a starter is 40-40-2.

[J. Kapp 11]

As everyone knows, I can't let misquoted stats go unchecked.

That 0-10-1 is Cousins' record with the Vikings when trailing in the fourth quarter (no matter the opponents' record). Not his record against winning teams.

Of course, that's not a stat to write home about, either. But it's the wrong stat for the comment.

Sorry. I can't help myself.

Yeah I just heard that on my way home on a podcast I listen to. And again, how reliable is a stat like that? It almost sounds like it has the intention of making it sound worse than it really is just to hype up the “Cousins can’t win a big game” argument. Simply in the sense of, for example, the buffalo game last year. We went into the 4th quarter down 27-0. If he came back from that he’d be a hero. Clearly he didn’t play well early on but that’s beside the point. There were definitely some games where a win was still reachable 100%. But I’m sure when you look across the league, any team that’s down by multiple scores going into the 4th quarter, their QBs record is terrible. Again, not saying all were like that but there were definitely some. So I don’t put a lot of weight into hunted “on the surface” stats like that

I agree with you ... to an extent.

It's like wins for a pitcher in baseball. They're not the most reliable stat in the world. If you lose 1-0, it's pretty safe to say you did enough to win, but your team didn't help. But if your won-loss record is 0-20, there's something amiss that can't simply be attributed to the team.

If I were you, I wouldn't use the Buffalo game as a measuring stick for anything, especially for Cousins. Yes, the entire team stunk. But so did Cousins. His turnovers put us in the early hole to begin with.

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. Another is the Packers game last year at Lambeau. In that one, we WERE down multiple scores going into the fourth, after which Cousins played his best ball as a Viking to get us back to a tie. Unfortunately, Daniel Carlson biffed away what should have been a win with missed field goals.

The 0-10-1 stat isn't completely fair, but as that number on the right (wrong) side of the ledger grows, it starts to become telling. I really hope he turns it around, starting this Sunday in Dallas. Surely you know, I'm rooting for the guy. Big time.

[Cliff]

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.