Kirk Cousins' contract is a bargain

[J. Kapp 11]

How about sack % where they are 13th despite the QB having the longest time to throw in the NFL?

Or power run blocking where they are 9th, or run stuff % where they are the 6th lowest? Adjusted line yards where they are 5th.
Stupid stats that don't mean anything compared to a PFF grade.

Actual results on the field versus what is essentially an arbitrary grade. Which one matters the most in the W column?

Not sure why you’re bringing up anything to do with this OL run blocking. I said that’s where the giant improvement was in the original post. I said the PASS blocking is still the problem. But I’m glad you went to google and tried to find one pass blocking stat they were good in so you could use it in your argument. The main reason sacks are down from last year is because they are getting him outside the pocket and not sitting directly behind a bunch of trash cans like flip did. Have you seen cousins numbers outside the pocket?! They are insane.

But either way, I don’t know how many times I have to prove your “time to throw” stat faulty for you to stop bringing it up in 95% of your cousins arguments. He’s playing like a top QB in this league right now stump, it’s ok for you to admit that. He’s outplaying his contract right now. It’s ok for you to admit that. But instead you have to sit here and continue to fight it. Just stop. You’re wasting your time.

If you think our OL is good and constantly defend Xavier Rhodes, all I can say is I’m glad you aren’t our GM. You defend this OL and Rhodes but it pains you to say Cousins is a good quarterback and playing like a top QB? Given how this season is going....that absolutely baffles me and it shows me that you really don’t know what you’re talking about. Maybe I’ve been the one wasting my time arguing with you

Not only that, PHP, but the O-line hasn't even been that good at run blocking lately.

We've had less than 100 yards rushing three of the past four games, which is a big reason we're only 2-2 over that stretch.

One big factor in BOTH the passing and running games is Adam Thielen. With him being out, not only does it give Cousins fewer targets, but it allows defenses to put more guys in the box, which hurts the running game. Yet Cousins has still produced.

What kind of numbers might this offense have if Thielen had been healthy? They were turning into a juggernaut by the Detroit game. It's been much more of a struggle since. Cousins is now on the fringes of the MVP conversation, if he's in it at all. With Thielen, I believe it would have been between Jackson, Wilson and Cousins. That's how well our guy was playing, and he's still playing pretty darned well.

[StumpHunter]

A few things:

The article attributes things like contested catch rate and YAC to the QB. While a QB can have an impact on both of those stats (more so the contested catches), the receivers have way more to do with that than QB. Throwing a screen pass behind the line of scrimmage to Dalvin that goes for 30 is not a great play by the QB. The two circus catches in the Dallas game to Diggs and Rudy were not great throws, they were great catches by Diggs and Rudy. Now, hitting receivers in stride helps with YAC and Cousins has done that for the most part outside of Monday and at KC, and he has had great throws like the one to Theilen against Detroit that Adam got hurt on. Also, Cousins is being paid the 2nd most of any QB in the NFL this year. He is not close to being the second best QB. He is not worth the contract. Closer to being worth it than last year ATM, but he is still being overpaid based on what his peers are doing.

There is zero evidence that Cousins would be willing to give the Vikings a deal and a whole lot of evidence that Cousins, like every QB not named Brady, wants to make as much money as he can before he retires. The biggest reason he is not in Washington right now is because he wanted to be paid like a top 5 QB, specifically on the guarantee front, and they didn't think he was worth that much. The only way you get a deal on him is if he completely falls apart in the next 4 games. In other words, you can get a deal on him if you don't actually want to extend him.

The last thing I want to point out, is that like S197 has pointed out, paying such a high price for a QB, any QB, does hurt the team.
You would think that with the importance of the position, the teams paying good veteran starters would win considerably more games. However, that is not the case on average. Since 2013, there is zero correlation between winning and how much you pay your QB. That means teams paying rookies and journeyman starters are winning just as much as teams paying guys 10+% of the cap. Rookies and borderline starters are winning as much as good veteran starters. That means either the QB position is pretty much irrelevant to winning, and you shouldn’t bother paying them 10+% of the cap, or the benefit of having a good veteran QB over a rookie or journeyman QB, is completely cancelled out by the amount of cap they take up.

That is also just the regular season. The difference in SB winning QBs who make a lot of the cap versus ones that don’t is even more dramatic. Since the cap was instituted in 1994, only 5 QBs have won the Super Bowl making 11+% of the cap. Steve Young, Peyton X 2, Tom Brady and Eli. 3 of the greatest all time and Eli who just caught fire at the right time. No QB has ever won it making more than 13% of the cap. Ours is making 15% this year, and will likely be at 15% next year.
https://ftw.usatoday.com/2018/02/nfl-qu ... ree-agency

So what does that mean? Do you let Rodgers walk if he asks for more than 10% of the cap? I don’t think so. IMO, it means that the worst possible thing you can do as a GM if you are looking to win a SB, is pay a QB who is not elite like he can carry a team. Brady, Rodgers, Brees and Wilson can score with less than ideal weapons on offense. They make the players around them better, so you can afford to give them more. Lesser QBs? You probably want to seriously consider giving that cap to multiple starters to make the team better, and seeing if you can catch lightning in a bottle with a rookie QB. It is a fine line, but if you are on the wrong side of that line, like the Lions have been for the past 5 years or so, it essentially guarantees you will not compete for a SB and puts you in NFL purgatory. Maybe that is better than being the Browns and being perpetually bad and constantly drafting QBs in the first round, but I doubt it.

[Dames]

There's a saying, you miss 100% of the shots you never take. I'm not saying use a pick every single year but zero in the last decade? C'mon, you have to try. When you don't it leads to panic drafting guys like Ponder or having to pay huge sums to guys like Cousins.

I couldn't agree more with that sentiment. I hate that we don't continue to try to take dart throws (at least) at QB in draft. We don't have to draft them early every year, but once a while would be damn nice. It seems pretty stupid that the most important position in football seems to be mostly ignored in the draft until it's a necessity.

[StumpHunter]

How about sack % where they are 13th despite the QB having the longest time to throw in the NFL?

Or power run blocking where they are 9th, or run stuff % where they are the 6th lowest? Adjusted line yards where they are 5th.
Stupid stats that don't mean anything compared to a PFF grade.

Actual results on the field versus what is essentially an arbitrary grade. Which one matters the most in the W column?

Not sure why you’re bringing up anything to do with this OL run blocking. I said that’s where the giant improvement was in the original post. I said the PASS blocking is still the problem. But I’m glad you went to google and tried to find one pass blocking stat they were good in so you could use it in your argument. The main reason sacks are down from last year is because they are getting him outside the pocket and not sitting directly behind a bunch of trash cans like flip did. Have you seen cousins numbers outside the pocket?! They are insane.

But either way, I don’t know how many times I have to prove your “time to throw” stat faulty for you to stop bringing it up in 95% of your cousins arguments. He’s playing like a top QB in this league right now stump, it’s ok for you to admit that. He’s outplaying his contract right now. It’s ok for you to admit that. But instead you have to sit here and continue to fight it. Just stop. You’re wasting your time.

If you think our OL is good and constantly defend Xavier Rhodes, all I can say is I’m glad you aren’t our GM. You defend this OL and Rhodes but it pains you to say Cousins is a good quarterback and playing like a top QB? Given how this season is going....that absolutely baffles me and it shows me that you really don’t know what you’re talking about. Maybe I’ve been the one wasting my time arguing with you

Yea, the only evidence I found that the pass blocking is better than their PFF grade is how often the QB gets sacked and how long the QB has to throw the football. They are also top 6 in fewest QB hits given up.

So we have sacks, time to throw, how often the QB is hit versus an arbitrary PFF grade. Fact versus opinion.

[StumpHunter]

There's a saying, you miss 100% of the shots you never take. I'm not saying use a pick every single year but zero in the last decade? C'mon, you have to try. When you don't it leads to panic drafting guys like Ponder or having to pay huge sums to guys like Cousins.

I couldn't agree more with that sentiment. I hate that we don't continue to try to take dart throws (at least) at QB in draft. We don't have to draft them early every year, but once a while would be damn nice. It seems pretty stupid that the most important position in football seems to be mostly ignored in the draft until it's a necessity.

Not taking shots on QBs in the mid rounds is not the problem. If you have 100+ million locked up in your QB, unless they start to play terrible or get hurt, you are never going to get dividends from those picks, regardless of how good those QBs turn out to be. Those guys won't see the field, will enter FAs, and make another team better.

[Dames]

I couldn't agree more with that sentiment. I hate that we don't continue to try to take dart throws (at least) at QB in draft. We don't have to draft them early every year, but once a while would be damn nice. It seems pretty stupid that the most important position in football seems to be mostly ignored in the draft until it's a necessity.

Not taking shots on QBs in the mid rounds is not the problem. If you have 100+ million locked up in your QB, unless they start to play terrible or get hurt, you are never going to get dividends from those picks, regardless of how good those QBs turn out to be. Those guys won't see the field, will enter FAs, and make another team better.

The point was to take shots before Cousins was even an option. Maybe there was a guy that was good enough where we didn't even need to go after Cousins in the first place. There's a decent chance that none of them worked out, but we didn't exactly give it a chance. It's a bit late now. Not that's it's a bad idea to try to take some shots still, because we don't know how long Cousins will be here or if he'll continue to play well. I love what he's doing this year, but he was awful last year overall. If we change coordinators, and/or he reverts next year, we are back to nothing again.

[S197]

I couldn't agree more with that sentiment. I hate that we don't continue to try to take dart throws (at least) at QB in draft. We don't have to draft them early every year, but once a while would be damn nice. It seems pretty stupid that the most important position in football seems to be mostly ignored in the draft until it's a necessity.

Not taking shots on QBs in the mid rounds is not the problem. If you have 100+ million locked up in your QB, unless they start to play terrible or get hurt, you are never going to get dividends from those picks, regardless of how good those QBs turn out to be. Those guys won't see the field, will enter FAs, and make another team better.

I disagree. It's about having insurance, a contingency and potential succession. It's like health insurance, it's not a waste if you don't end up in the ER, it's there in the event you do. Look at the Patriots:



A dynastic team with the GOAT at QB and look at what they do in the draft. They drafted two starting NFL QBs despite having Brady. Rick has drafted... Joe Webb and John David Booty.

[StumpHunter]

Not taking shots on QBs in the mid rounds is not the problem. If you have 100+ million locked up in your QB, unless they start to play terrible or get hurt, you are never going to get dividends from those picks, regardless of how good those QBs turn out to be. Those guys won't see the field, will enter FAs, and make another team better.

I disagree. It's about having insurance, a contingency and potential succession. It's like health insurance, it's not a waste if you don't end up in the ER, it's there in the event you do. Look at the Patriots:



A dynastic team with the GOAT at QB and look at what they do in the draft. They drafted two starting NFL QBs despite having Brady. Rick has drafted... Joe Webb and John David Booty.

Well, let's look at what drafting Jimmy G and Jacoby netted the Pats:

4 starts, a 2018 2nd round pick and a garbage WR.

What did it cost them? A 2014 2nd round pick and a 2016 3rd round pick.

Now, if you told me that the Vikings have the opportunity to draft a QB that would start 2 games for them and then be traded for a 2nd round pick 4 years later, I personally would prefer my team would use that 2nd round pick on someone who would contribute in more than 2 games in 4 seasons, even if it meant the Vikings got a 2nd back after he was gone. A 2nd this year is worth way more than a 2nd in 2023 after all, for obvious reasons. Jacoby on the other hand was a complete waste of a 3rd.

Essentially, those two QBs prove my point. If you believe they are good starters (and both have a ways to go before I concede that), they provided no significant benefit to the team that drafted them and are really only helping the team they went to after the Pats.

Go ahead and draft guys in the 2nd and 3rd, but unless you are "lucky" enough to have your starter go down for an extended amount of time due to injury or being a bad QB, that QB will provide little to no value to your team.

Now, if you want a good model for what to do at QB, look at what the Chiefs and Ravens did. The Cheifs, and to a lesser extent the Ravens had a solid QB in Smith and Flacco, but didn't feel they were good enough to win it all (yes I know Flacco won early in his career before he turned into checkdown machine). Instead of worrying about starting over with a rookie and playing it safe with their veteran starter, they saw QBs in the draft with the potential to be elite, and made moves to get them in the 1st round. Part of the reason they were able to do that is because they were not currently locked into their vet QBs for multiple guaranteed 28+ million dollar seasons...

[S197]

As I said, it's not always about drafting to find a replacement, I don't understand why that's difficult for you to understand. Not only that, your argument is completely based on hindsight. What if Brady had gone down? The Pats would have still been in pretty good shape. If our starter goes down, we get Josh Freeman throwing into space or Shaun Hill with his laughable arm strength.

The fact remains the Pats still had a solid contingency AND received compensation when they felt they no longer needed it. It doesn't even need to be a 2nd or 3rd rounder. Who have we taken in the 4th? The 5th? The 6th?!?

Nevermind ignoring what the Redskins got out of drafting Cousins in the 4th. That's how a contingency plan works out. And what makes it worse is we've suffered so many setbacks at QB it's a much higher scenario of happening here. We've literally had no QB play two full seasons in a row since Tarkenton. Cousins has a chance to break that but think about that trend for a second. How does that track record not make you plan ahead? It's bonkers.

The Patriots don't prove your point, it proves mine. It doesn't matter how solid your starter is, you simply have to have a plan if #### goes south. The Vikings plan, if you want to call it that, has been baffling.

[StumpHunter]

As I said, it's not always about drafting to find a replacement, I don't understand why that's difficult for you to understand. Not only that, your argument is completely based on hindsight. What if Brady had gone down? The Pats would have still been in pretty good shape. If our starter goes down, we get Josh Freeman throwing into space or Shaun Hill with his laughable arm strength.

The fact remains the Pats still had a solid contingency AND received compensation when they felt they no longer needed it. It doesn't even need to be a 2nd or 3rd rounder. Who have we taken in the 4th? The 5th? The 6th?!?

Nevermind ignoring what the Redskins got out of drafting Cousins in the 4th. That's how a contingency plan works out. And what makes it worse is we've suffered so many setbacks at QB it's a much higher scenario of happening here. We've literally had no QB play two full seasons in a row since Tarkenton. Cousins has a chance to break that but think about that trend for a second. How does that track record not make you plan ahead? It's bonkers.

The Patriots don't prove your point, it proves mine. It doesn't matter how solid your starter is, you simply have to have a plan if #### goes south. The Vikings plan, if you want to call it that, has been baffling.

I agree there. Not drafting Wilson despite your coaches wanting him because you drafted Christian Ponder the season before?

Giving up a 1st for a bad QB with worse career stats than your current backup in a year with Mahomes and Watson?

Overpaying for a 500 QB with Jackson sitting right there in the first for you to have if you just take a shot at greatness?

However, if the Vikings extend Cousins there is very little chance of ever seeing dividends in drafting a QB in the the later rounds. He doesn't get hurt, and he will be making too much to be benched. Rick knows this and it will not matter if the combination of Montana, Favre and Tom Brady finds is available in the draft, he wont select him.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Not sure why you’re bringing up anything to do with this OL run blocking. I said that’s where the giant improvement was in the original post. I said the PASS blocking is still the problem. But I’m glad you went to google and tried to find one pass blocking stat they were good in so you could use it in your argument. The main reason sacks are down from last year is because they are getting him outside the pocket and not sitting directly behind a bunch of trash cans like flip did. Have you seen cousins numbers outside the pocket?! They are insane.

But either way, I don’t know how many times I have to prove your “time to throw” stat faulty for you to stop bringing it up in 95% of your cousins arguments. He’s playing like a top QB in this league right now stump, it’s ok for you to admit that. He’s outplaying his contract right now. It’s ok for you to admit that. But instead you have to sit here and continue to fight it. Just stop. You’re wasting your time.

If you think our OL is good and constantly defend Xavier Rhodes, all I can say is I’m glad you aren’t our GM. You defend this OL and Rhodes but it pains you to say Cousins is a good quarterback and playing like a top QB? Given how this season is going....that absolutely baffles me and it shows me that you really don’t know what you’re talking about. Maybe I’ve been the one wasting my time arguing with you

Yea, the only evidence I found that the pass blocking is better than their PFF grade is how often the QB gets sacked and how long the QB has to throw the football. They are also top 6 in fewest QB hits given up.

So we have sacks, time to throw, how often the QB is hit versus an arbitrary PFF grade. Fact versus opinion.

Fact versus opinion? PFF analyzes each play. They aren’t just a stat sheet. Stats do not tell all.

Per PFF:

We aren’t grading players based on the yardage they rack up or the stats they collect. Statistics can be indicative of performance but don’t tell the whole story and can often lie badly. Quarterbacks can throw the ball straight to defenders but if the ball is dropped, you won't see it on the stat sheet. Conversely, they can dump the ball off on a sequence of screen passes and end up with a gaudy looking stat line if those skill position players do enough work after the catch.

PFF grades the play, not its result, so the quarterback that throws the ball to defenders will be downgraded whether the defender catches the ball to notch the interception on the stat sheet or not. No amount of broken tackles and yards after the catch from a bubble screen will earn a quarterback a better grade, even though his passing stats may be getting padded.

The same is true for most positions. Statistics – as we saw with Beasley earlier – can be misleading. A tackle whose quarterback gets the ball out of his hands quicker than anybody else may not give up many sacks, but he can still be beaten often and earn a poor grade. Receivers that are targeted relentlessly could post big time numbers, but may offer little more than the product of a volume-based aerial attack.

They are grading exactly what you aren’t paying any attention to. They are seeing something that myself and others see but you ignore. And that’s the fact that our OL has not held up well. Maybe it shows on those trusty stat sheets but it’s not showing when you watch the film and watch each play. We have 1 offensive lineman on this team that is a legitimate pass blocker and that’s O’Neill. The other 4 are average at best to terrible.

They have done much better run blocking compared to last year but pass blocking isn’t a whole lot better than last year. I see that, others on here see that, PFF sees that but you...don’t. Why? Because Kirk cousins has made you look like such a fool this year that you can’t bring yourself to admitting you were wrong about him. You defend the OL because it’s the only straw you have left to grasp onto. Which is fricken pathetic if you ask me because not a soul on here has defended this OL as a unit since who knows when. They have hardly improved and that’s what you’re running to? Talking them up after an Oakland game who has a below average DL?? Desperation at its finest right there.

It kills me when I go on the chat after cousins gets sacked in 2 seconds and watch the haters go “THROW THE BALL”. Like wtf? I can name so many sacks this year where cousins didn’t even have a chance to get to his second read before getting sacked. Or did anyone by chance think nobody was open? I’ve practically proved that by giving the times on how quick he was sacked. Has there been a few times he held it too long? Sure. Every QB does. But he’s been sacked way less than last year. Primarily because of the amount of rollouts he is doing compared to 2018 and now teams also have to respect the run which can flush them out vs the pass. Not because of the OL. Again O’Neill is legit, Bradbury has struggled in passing pro, Elflein has struggled in pass pro. Klein has been ok and Reiff has struggled with speed rushers. The only differences on this OL compared to last year is Kline and Bradbury. And neither are anything astonishing in that regard right now.

So how does an OL make THAT big of a jump statistically since 2018? They don’t. A lot of these rollouts, screens and quick passes are drastically hiding their true colors. And when those type plays are called, you’re seeing their struggles show. Get your “I hate cousins blinders” off for 5 seconds and take a step into reality. Don’t you find it odd that you’re one of the only ones, if not THE only one defending this OL on here? 99% of the time when someone is that outnumbered in an argument they are wrong.

[Pondering Her Percy]

As I said, it's not always about drafting to find a replacement, I don't understand why that's difficult for you to understand. Not only that, your argument is completely based on hindsight. What if Brady had gone down? The Pats would have still been in pretty good shape. If our starter goes down, we get Josh Freeman throwing into space or Shaun Hill with his laughable arm strength.

The fact remains the Pats still had a solid contingency AND received compensation when they felt they no longer needed it. It doesn't even need to be a 2nd or 3rd rounder. Who have we taken in the 4th? The 5th? The 6th?!?

Nevermind ignoring what the Redskins got out of drafting Cousins in the 4th. That's how a contingency plan works out. And what makes it worse is we've suffered so many setbacks at QB it's a much higher scenario of happening here. We've literally had no QB play two full seasons in a row since Tarkenton. Cousins has a chance to break that but think about that trend for a second. How does that track record not make you plan ahead? It's bonkers.

The Patriots don't prove your point, it proves mine. It doesn't matter how solid your starter is, you simply have to have a plan if #### goes south. The Vikings plan, if you want to call it that, has been baffling.

I agree there. Not drafting Wilson despite your coaches wanting him because you drafted Christian Ponder the season before?

Giving up a 1st for a bad QB with worse career stats than your current backup in a year with Mahomes and Watson?

Overpaying for a 500 QB with Jackson sitting right there in the first for you to have if you just take a shot at greatness?

However, if the Vikings extend Cousins there is very little chance of ever seeing dividends in drafting a QB in the the later rounds. He doesn't get hurt, and he will be making too much to be benched. Rick knows this and it will not matter if the combination of Montana, Favre and Tom Brady finds is available in the draft, he wont select him.

I’ll be the first to say I was wrong about Jackson but there were GIANT question marks in regards to him throwing the football coming out, hence why he fell so far. You do that draft over again and he goes 1st overall. So 31ish teams also passed on Jackson so that should tell you something.

And enough with the “.500” QB crap. He was in fricken Washington. Case keenum is in Washington now but we aren’t allowed to talk about him because Washington’s roster is terrible and ours is good. Yet, we can talk about cousins in Washington all we want because his teams weren’t terrible or anything? That’s like when guys on here use to bitc# about spielman and say “yeah look what he did in Miami”. Did that matter at all? Like one bit? No because look at the roster he has built here. This league is all about what you do now. And Kirk cousins is playing like a top QB in this league, whether you like it or not.

And oh yeah, we shouldn’t have made a trade in the 2016 offseason after losing our young QB because there was Pat Mahomes (who was coming off a 7-6 sophomore season) sitting in the draft the FOLLOWING offseason. Do you realize how much changes in a season of college football? How quick draft stock can go up or down?

I mean a perfect example is Joe Burrow from LSU. Prior to this college football season, he wasn’t anywhere near a projected first round pick. It was all Tua and Herbert. Tua ended up getting injured and his stock has fallen and Herbert went from a top 2 pick to a mid first round pick. NOW Burrow is the clear cut first overall pick.

So that situation you’re trying to say spielman is so dumb for up above is like saying:

Let’s pretend we traded for cousins this past offseason with Washington. And it entailed our first round pick. Then the season hits and Joe Burrow is going off like he has been. And then comes into the NFL and lights it up like Mahomes. That’s like someone saying “we waste our first round pick on cousins when Burrow was available”. NO! Because at the time of the trade, Burrow was nowhere near a projected first round pick.

Look at this article and see where Burrow was ranked in the preseason....25th!!
https://www.google.com/amp/s/247sports ... 24138/Amp/

Go look at this article and see where Pat Mahomes was ranked in the preseason....14th!!
https://www.google.com/amp/s/athlonspo ... 2015%3famp


Yeah Watson was listed high but by the looks of it, at the time, he was going first overall and even if we stuck with Shaun hill that year, we weren’t finishing anywhere near the #1 overall pick. It’s not like the rest of our roster was bad. It was just the QB position going into the year.

So to sit there and try to pull the “what was spielman thinking” argument for the Bradford trade, it’s bull. It’s easy to sit there and see they are stars NOW and say what was he thinking. But at the time of teddys injury, Mahomes was not a projected first rounder. Just like Burrow wasn’t a projected first rounder this year. Things change over the course of the college football season, into the pre-draft process, into the combine and into the pro days.

And for you to have once claimed that you “knew” about Mahomes going into the 2016 college season and wanted him in the first round of the 2017 draft, is arguably the biggest bull crap statement I’ve ever seen on here. Maybe you knew who he was like some may have if they watch college ball. But having no clue what his junior year was going to consist of or how he’d do leading up to the draft, makes that statement downright laughable. But unfortunately I have no way of proving you wrong because you weren’t on the board then. Instead I just straight up believe you’re lying through your teeth

[StumpHunter]

I honestly didn't read most of that. I did however read you admit that you were wrong about Jackson, which you absolutely were not at one point. When looking at things through non-Cousins tinted glasses, before we signed Cousins and you became his number one sycophant, you thought Jackson would be a good fit for the team. That was a great take, and is a great example of how fandom can ruin someone's perspective on reality.

Before Cousins the MVP of 2019 was a good fit for this team. After Cousins he is "a terrible passer" and not someone you would want on the team.

[StumpHunter]

Talking them up after an Oakland game who has a below average DL?? Desperation at its finest right there.

You said that since Oakland's pass rush was the worst in the NFL in 2018 not giving up a sack to them didn't mean anything, and I said they were much improved over last season. Considering that with 4 games to go they already have twice as many sacks as 2018, I am pretty sure I nailed it. You should probably stop using this example as some sort of win for you. It is kind of embarrassing.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Talking them up after an Oakland game who has a below average DL?? Desperation at its finest right there.

You said that since Oakland's pass rush was the worst in the NFL in 2018 not giving up a sack to them didn't mean anything, and I said they were much improved over last season. Considering that with 4 games to go they already have twice as many sacks as 2018, I am pretty sure I nailed it. You should probably stop using this example as some sort of win for you. It is kind of embarrassing.

What's embarrassing is your logic behind this. Last year, the Raiders had 13 sacks on the year. THIRTEEN! It was the lowest sack total by a team in almost 40 years. The 2nd worst sack total last year was the Giants and Patriots tied at 30 which was more than double what the Raiders had. THAT's how large of a gap there was. Do you realize just how hard that is to pull off? So to say THEY were much improved, is like saying the Lions were much improved following an 0-16 season. Well, yeah, ya cant really get any worse than that! So was anyone going to say "Yeah the Vikings beat up on the Lions in '09 and they were a much improved team following that 0-16 season"?? Uh nope, they might have improved some, but they still arent very good at all.

Insert: Oaklands pass rush. They are ranked 22nd in the NFL this year in sacks. That's still well below average. So maybe they were improved this year but they are still NOT GOOD. So to try and use a weak argument like saying our OL held up well against Oaklands pass rush, carries zero weight. Literally zero. So I'm not sure what you think you "nailed" other than multiplying 13 sacks x 2 and saying they doubled their numbers from last year. But again, they are still a well below average pass rushing team. Just because a boy grows some balls, doesnt make him a man yet.