RF54
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 3,857
|
Post by RF54 on May 2, 2023 19:41:04 GMT -6
So how many of you here used the term "I am taking my toys and going home" when you did not get your way. First and foremost it is a business, getting butts in the seats and selling merch is the drivers of all things Competitive rebuild is the way you do that "reset" is not. Overspending for short term gain is not (sorry the Rams did this and will be also rans for a long time, even then it was at the very last point of the window). The Brown have blown it up on a consistent basis and still have not succeeded. Right now the model teams are the Eagles, Chiefs, Bills, Bengals, 49 ers. None of those teams "Blew it up and started over only the 49ers' and Bengals were really below 500 teams for any amount of time. But they had pieces in place that most of you would want to jetison. LOL, the Bills were a horrible team for 20+ years and barely became competative when Allen entered his 3rd year and they traded for Diggs. They blew it up 4 or 5 times in the 17 years I lived in western NY. The same could be said for the Bengals before they drafted Burrow.
|
|
mjollnir
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 2,188
|
Post by mjollnir on May 3, 2023 7:25:25 GMT -6
So how many of you here used the term "I am taking my toys and going home" when you did not get your way. First and foremost it is a business, getting butts in the seats and selling merch is the drivers of all things Competitive rebuild is the way you do that "reset" is not. Overspending for short term gain is not (sorry the Rams did this and will be also rans for a long time, even then it was at the very last point of the window). The Brown have blown it up on a consistent basis and still have not succeeded. Right now the model teams are the Eagles, Chiefs, Bills, Bengals, 49 ers. None of those teams "Blew it up and started over only the 49ers' and Bengals were really below 500 teams for any amount of time. But they had pieces in place that most of you would want to jetison. LOL, the Bills were a horrible team for 20+ years and barely became competative when Allen entered his 3rd year and they traded for Diggs. They blew it up 4 or 5 times in the 17 years I lived in western NY. The same could be said for the Bengals before they drafted Burrow. The Bills lived in a division where everyone else was playing for the 2nd in the division and a wildcard. The Bengals clung to Lewis far to long. But at what point did either of these teams clean house, they allowed players to walk via free agency but the Bengal invested in high dollar names, Chad Johnson, Terell Owens the Bills Marshawn Lynch, Terell Owens, LeShean McCoy. Again they were trying everything to win short of starting over.
|
|
|
Post by VikingBerserker on May 3, 2023 11:58:23 GMT -6
So how many of you here used the term "I am taking my toys and going home" when you did not get your way. First and foremost it is a business, getting butts in the seats and selling merch is the drivers of all things Competitive rebuild is the way you do that "reset" is not. Overspending for short term gain is not (sorry the Rams did this and will be also rans for a long time, even then it was at the very last point of the window). The Brown have blown it up on a consistent basis and still have not succeeded. Right now the model teams are the Eagles, Chiefs, Bills, Bengals, 49 ers. None of those teams "Blew it up and started over only the 49ers' and Bengals were really below 500 teams for any amount of time. But they had pieces in place that most of you would want to jetison. You really should look stuff up before you write such things. The Chiefs had 5 losing seasons in the 6 years before they hired Andy Reid, which included 2-14. They made they playoffs three years in a row with Alex Smith at QB, but they traded up to the #10 spot in 2017 to pick Mahomes, and they now have 2 Lombardis, and if their OL hadn't been decimated in the playoffs, they could easily have three. The Bills had a string of about 10 losing seasons out of 13, with a string of 17 years but making the playoffs, before they hired Sean McDermott. In McDermott's second year, Buffalo traded up from #12 to #7 to be able to draft Josh Allen. The Eagles have been mostly good, because they have had coaches like Andy Reid and Doug Pederson, but remember, they fired both of those guys, in Pederson's case, only 3 years after he won a SB for them with Carson Wentz and Nick Foles at QB! I'm not sure if this is what the OP meant -- but I think the lessons from the Chiefs/Eagles is what the Vikings are likely hoping they can replicate. The Bills were a totally different deal -- they were terrible and had a top 7 pick to take Allen who fell to them because 2 other teams chose to take Baker Maysfield and Sam Darnold first (a big ouch in hindsight). To me the lessons the Vikes want from the Chiefs is that Reid and Alex Smith had them winning and in playoffs (3 of 4 first years) but I think Reid knew that Smith wasn't likely taking them to a SB so he chose to trade and go get Mahomes (who also fortunately fell low enough they could do it). Mahomes sat year 1 and watched Smith again make playoffs and lose a Wildcard game. Then Chiefs traded Smith and started Mahomes to the wild success we all know. Problem with all this is how the Vikes can find their own Mahomes (or Hurts for that matter) as I don't see them being close to the top 5 picks anytime soon.
|
|
2012mom
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 4,366
|
Post by 2012mom on May 3, 2023 16:32:14 GMT -6
You really should look stuff up before you write such things. The Chiefs had 5 losing seasons in the 6 years before they hired Andy Reid, which included 2-14. They made they playoffs three years in a row with Alex Smith at QB, but they traded up to the #10 spot in 2017 to pick Mahomes, and they now have 2 Lombardis, and if their OL hadn't been decimated in the playoffs, they could easily have three. The Bills had a string of about 10 losing seasons out of 13, with a string of 17 years but making the playoffs, before they hired Sean McDermott. In McDermott's second year, Buffalo traded up from #12 to #7 to be able to draft Josh Allen. The Eagles have been mostly good, because they have had coaches like Andy Reid and Doug Pederson, but remember, they fired both of those guys, in Pederson's case, only 3 years after he won a SB for them with Carson Wentz and Nick Foles at QB! I'm not sure if this is what the OP meant -- but I think the lessons from the Chiefs/Eagles is what the Vikings are likely hoping they can replicate.Β The Bills were a totally different deal -- they were terrible and had a top 7 pick to take Allen who fell to them because 2 other teams chose to take Baker Maysfield and Sam Darnold first (a big ouch in hindsight). To me the lessons the Vikes want from the Chiefs is that Reid and Alex Smith had them winning and in playoffs (3 of 4 first years) but I think Reid knew that Smith wasn't likely taking them to a SB so he chose to trade and go get Mahomes (who also fortunately fell low enough they could do it).Β Mahomes sat year 1 and watched Smith again make playoffs and lose a Wildcard game. Then Chiefs traded Smith and started Mahomes to the wild success we all know. Problem with all this is how the Vikes can find their own Mahomes (or Hurts for that matter) as I don't see them being close to the top 5 picks anytime soon.Β The point I had been responding to was the point the other poster stated, that teams like Buffalo hadn't been bad for long. They were. I think that our thoughts are similar in this. Teams that win Super Bowls need the right GM, HC and QB, usually in that order. I think that KOC can be the right coach, and I hope that Kwesi can be the right GM. I agree that the Vikings situation looks a lot like KC with Alex Smith, and like you, I think they need to draft a young QB, although Cousins is NOT the reason they've failed the last two years. To your last point, I agree that, as things stand now, the Vikings are likely to be in the middle ranks of the draft yet again next year, but they're going to need to have the #1 pick to get the USC QB in the next draft. I've posted elsewhere that the surest way to get that #1 would be to trade Cousins. I don't think the Vikings will do it, but in the long term, if they really think the USC kid is "the guy," they need to do what it takes to get him.
|
|
Vikeroo
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 10,199
|
Post by Vikeroo on May 3, 2023 17:16:35 GMT -6
I'm not sure if this is what the OP meant -- but I think the lessons from the Chiefs/Eagles is what the Vikings are likely hoping they can replicate. The Bills were a totally different deal -- they were terrible and had a top 7 pick to take Allen who fell to them because 2 other teams chose to take Baker Maysfield and Sam Darnold first (a big ouch in hindsight). To me the lessons the Vikes want from the Chiefs is that Reid and Alex Smith had them winning and in playoffs (3 of 4 first years) but I think Reid knew that Smith wasn't likely taking them to a SB so he chose to trade and go get Mahomes (who also fortunately fell low enough they could do it). Mahomes sat year 1 and watched Smith again make playoffs and lose a Wildcard game. Then Chiefs traded Smith and started Mahomes to the wild success we all know. Problem with all this is how the Vikes can find their own Mahomes (or Hurts for that matter) as I don't see them being close to the top 5 picks anytime soon. The point I had been responding to was the point the other poster stated, that teams like Buffalo hadn't been bad for long. They were. I think that our thoughts are similar in this. Teams that win Super Bowls need the right GM, HC and QB, usually in that order. I think that KOC can be the right coach, and I hope that Kwesi can be the right GM. I agree that the Vikings situation looks a lot like KC with Alex Smith, and like you, I think they need to draft a young QB, although Cousins is NOT the reason they've failed the last two years. To your last point, I agree that, as things stand now, the Vikings are likely to be in the middle ranks of the draft yet again next year, but they're going to need to have the #1 pick to get the USC QB in the next draft. I've posted elsewhere that the surest way to get that #1 would be to trade Cousins. I don't think the Vikings will do it, but in the long term, if they really think the USC kid is "the guy," they need to do what it takes to get him. To be fair there might be 6 or 7 legit 1st round grade QB's next year. I am positive on about 5 of them. Still someone is bound to get hurt or this and that. Probably better class then the one with Herbert and Burrow in it honestly.
|
|
|
Post by VikingBerserker on May 4, 2023 8:25:02 GMT -6
The point I had been responding to was the point the other poster stated, that teams like Buffalo hadn't been bad for long. They were. I think that our thoughts are similar in this. Teams that win Super Bowls need the right GM, HC and QB, usually in that order. I think that KOC can be the right coach, and I hope that Kwesi can be the right GM. I agree that the Vikings situation looks a lot like KC with Alex Smith, and like you, I think they need to draft a young QB, although Cousins is NOT the reason they've failed the last two years. To your last point, I agree that, as things stand now, the Vikings are likely to be in the middle ranks of the draft yet again next year, but they're going to need to have the #1 pick to get the USC QB in the next draft. I've posted elsewhere that the surest way to get that #1 would be to trade Cousins. I don't think the Vikings will do it, but in the long term, if they really think the USC kid is "the guy," they need to do what it takes to get him. Definitely Buffalo was not like Packers/Eagles. Bills had 17 years of mediocracy (typically ~6-7 wins, best 9-7) and a single playoff game before they picked Allen. Where Allen fell to 7 and Bills traded up with Tampa giving them their pick (#12) and two 2nd round picks. Pretty good trade in hindsight. Another option for Vikings could be like Bengals, be good/ok and then just tank hard one year to get the #1 pick. I don't even remember how they were 2-14 during Zac Taylor's first year (maybe on purpose?) but it paid off with Burrow. Bengals will probably waste his talents but he's got that "it" factor. Personally, I'll say I think to win SBs you need the right QB, HC and GM in that order. More and more, I think it's blind luck finding that superstar, franchise QB but every time it happens they instantly make their teams GM and HC look significantly better. I'm assuming here that the HC probably has more pull for draft picks than the GM so i put them second. With Cousins, we've seen what happens when a GM gives a coach a player he doesn't want.
|
|
lunas
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 2,273
|
Post by lunas on May 4, 2023 10:34:54 GMT -6
Trade Kirk
Tank the season to get the 1st of 2nd pick in the draft. Either tank or give up 4 1st round draft picks to get one of the 2 or 3 highest ranked QBβs in years. Iβd tank.
Go all in on Williams or Maye.
To change the course, you have to go in a different direction.
I donβt think they have the courage to do it, but it is an incredibly simple set of steps needed to accomplish these goals.
If not, go 9-8 for years on end and collect checks without ever winning a SB. Great for them, terrible for fans.
|
|
|
Post by VikingBerserker on May 4, 2023 10:53:54 GMT -6
Trade Kirk Tank the season to get the 1st of 2nd pick in the draft. Either tank or give up 4 1st round draft picks to get one of the 2 or 3 highest ranked QBβs in years. Iβd tank. Go all in on Williams or Maye. To change the course, you have to go in a different direction. I donβt think they have the courage to do it, but it is an incredibly simple set of steps needed to accomplish these goals. If not, go 9-8 for years on end and collect checks without ever winning a SB. Great for them, terrible for fans. This only works if (a) you don't wind up with the next Jamarcus Russell/Joey Harrington/Vince Young/David Carr (all top 3 picks) with that pick and (b) you don't scare off JJ (and other players/FAs) away from the team due to not having a real QB. Just saying there's a lot of luck into these QB drafts and very few sure things. Much higher chance statistically you wind up with a QB that's not actually better than Kirk. I listed serious bombs but there's lots of guys who could also be listed who were mediocre to good and never sniffed a SB. The frustration with Vikes and not being able to find a franchise QB is understandable though...
|
|
lunas
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 2,273
|
Post by lunas on May 4, 2023 11:01:25 GMT -6
Trade Kirk Tank the season to get the 1st of 2nd pick in the draft. Either tank or give up 4 1st round draft picks to get one of the 2 or 3 highest ranked QBβs in years. Iβd tank. Go all in on Williams or Maye. To change the course, you have to go in a different direction. I donβt think they have the courage to do it, but it is an incredibly simple set of steps needed to accomplish these goals. If not, go 9-8 for years on end and collect checks without ever winning a SB. Great for them, terrible for fans. This only works if (a) you don't wind up with the nextΒ Jamarcus Russell/Joey Harrington/Vince Young/David Carr (all top 3 picks) with that pick and (b) you don't scare off JJ (and other players/FAs) away from the team due to not having a real QB. Just saying there's a lot of luck into these QB drafts and very few sure things. Much higher chance statistically youΒ wind up with a QB that's not actually better than Kirk.Β I listed serious bombs but there's lots of guys who could also be listed who were mediocre to good and never sniffed a SB. The frustration with Vikes and not being able to find a franchise QB is understandable though... Who cares if they bomb? Thatβs like saying I donβt want to date again because my heart may get broken again and I will get hurt. Great, then live life by yourself, keep complaining about why you canβt find someone to love and how life is unfair. Everything in life has a risk/reward profile. Staying with Kirk is like having a cat or dog as companionship because you are too scared to get hurt by human beings. They wonβt leave you and wonβt hurt you. Playing it too safe in life is not living, and wonβt get you a Lombardi.
|
|
taz24
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 2,701
|
Post by taz24 on May 4, 2023 11:19:01 GMT -6
Tank is the Tpuppies motto not the Vikings.
Hasn't exactly filled the trophy room for them.
|
|
2012mom
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 4,366
|
Post by 2012mom on May 4, 2023 11:24:39 GMT -6
Trade Kirk Tank the season to get the 1st of 2nd pick in the draft. Either tank or give up 4 1st round draft picks to get one of the 2 or 3 highest ranked QBβs in years. Iβd tank. Go all in on Williams or Maye. To change the course, you have to go in a different direction. I donβt think they have the courage to do it, but it is an incredibly simple set of steps needed to accomplish these goals. If not, go 9-8 for years on end and collect checks without ever winning a SB. Great for them, terrible for fans. This only works if (a) you don't wind up with the nextΒ Jamarcus Russell/Joey Harrington/Vince Young/David Carr (all top 3 picks) with that pick and (b) you don't scare off JJ (and other players/FAs) away from the team due to not having a real QB. Just saying there's a lot of luck into these QB drafts and very few sure things. Much higher chance statistically youΒ wind up with a QB that's not actually better than Kirk.Β I listed serious bombs but there's lots of guys who could also be listed who were mediocre to good and never sniffed a SB. The frustration with Vikes and not being able to find a franchise QB is understandable though... All of the total bombs you listed were completely predictable, especially Jamarcus Russell. He had no work ethic and couldn't read a defense. Vince Young was a RB who could throw. Joey Harrington??? He was only drafted that high because Detroit was being Detroit. He had no arm and no "it." The only possible exception out of the group was David Carr, who, like Tim Couch in Cleveland, was ruined behind a terrible OL. I honestly don't know that you can even say whether those two guys would have been ok, if they had had decent OL and coaching. Anyway, I'm with lunas. While it's possible that the Vikings could get to the SB with Kirk, at his age, he's close to the end, and this defense doesn't have the horses to be a contender. Better to get trade value for him now, have one really crappy year, then have the benefit of being at the top of the draft in a good QB year.
|
|
|
Post by VikingBerserker on May 4, 2023 11:42:15 GMT -6
This only works if (a) you don't wind up with the next Jamarcus Russell/Joey Harrington/Vince Young/David Carr (all top 3 picks) with that pick and (b) you don't scare off JJ (and other players/FAs) away from the team due to not having a real QB. Just saying there's a lot of luck into these QB drafts and very few sure things. Much higher chance statistically you wind up with a QB that's not actually better than Kirk. I listed serious bombs but there's lots of guys who could also be listed who were mediocre to good and never sniffed a SB. The frustration with Vikes and not being able to find a franchise QB is understandable though... All of the total bombs you listed were completely predictable, especially Jamarcus Russell. He had no work ethic and couldn't read a defense. Vince Young was a RB who could throw. Joey Harrington??? He was only drafted that high because Detroit was being Detroit. He had no arm and no "it." The only possible exception out of the group was David Carr, who, like Tim Couch in Cleveland, was ruined behind a terrible OL. I honestly don't know that you can even say whether those two guys would have been ok, if they had had decent OL and coaching. Anyway, I'm with lunas. While it's possible that the Vikings could get to the SB with Kirk, at his age, he's close to the end, and this defense doesn't have the horses to be a contender. Better to get trade value for him now, have one really crappy year, then have the benefit of being at the top of the draft in a good QB year. Easy to say this in hindsight but the point is multiple NFL teams used top 3 picks on those guys. So apparently professionals in the NFL aren't really that good at picking "sure things" when it comes to QB. I agree that I don't think Kirk has the "it factor" needed to win a QB. There's been a few QBs that still won (e.g. Dilfer) but it took very special circumstances. So absolutely I would happily take a crappy year if it meant getting a franchise qb to replace Kirk -- my only point is there's no guaranteed sure things especially at QB. It's one reason you don't normally see NFL teams tank a whole season where it used to be common in the NBA which is why they now have a lottery to pick the order. Best example I can think of was the "Suck for Luck" draft where Colts lost Manning and tanked but even that didn't really work due to injuries. Now if you're 2-10 and then trot out your backup QB to make sure you lose the last remaining games...that's more likely. So if you strike out, it'll take a couple years to know (or you keep drafting 1st round QBs). If you have multiple losing seasons (especially horrible seasons) that makes it harder to re-sign your top players and it is harder to get free agents. Would JJ want to stay is he has to go through a couple 2-15 seasons? Or would he pull a Diggs?
|
|
2012mom
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 4,366
|
Post by 2012mom on May 4, 2023 12:27:41 GMT -6
All of the total bombs you listed were completely predictable, especially Jamarcus Russell. He had no work ethic and couldn't read a defense. Vince Young was a RB who could throw. Joey Harrington??? He was only drafted that high because Detroit was being Detroit. He had no arm and no "it." The only possible exception out of the group was David Carr, who, like Tim Couch in Cleveland, was ruined behind a terrible OL. I honestly don't know that you can even say whether those two guys would have been ok, if they had had decent OL and coaching. Anyway, I'm with lunas. While it's possible that the Vikings could get to the SB with Kirk, at his age, he's close to the end, and this defense doesn't have the horses to be a contender. Better to get trade value for him now, have one really crappy year, then have the benefit of being at the top of the draft in a good QB year. Easy to say this in hindsight but the point is multiple NFL teams used top 3 picks on those guys.Β So apparently professionals in the NFL aren't really that good at picking "sure things" when it comes to QB. I agree that I don't think Kirk has the "it factor" needed to win a QB. There's been a few QBs that still won (e.g. Dilfer) but it took very special circumstances.Β So absolutely I would happily take a crappy year if it meant getting a franchise qb to replace Kirk -- my only point is there's no guaranteed sure things especially at QB.Β It's one reason you don't normally see NFL teams tank a whole season where it used to be common in the NBA which is why they now have a lottery to pick the order.Β Best example I can think of was the "Suck for Luck" draft where Colts lost Manning and tanked but even that didn't really work due to injuries.Β Now if you're 2-10 and then trot out your backup QB to make sure you lose the last remaining games...that's more likely. So if you strike out, it'll take a couple years to know (or you keep drafting 1st round QBs).Β If you have multiple losing seasons (especially horrible seasons) that makes it harder to re-sign your top players and it is harder to get free agents.Β Would JJ want to stay is he has to go through a couple 2-15 seasons?Β Or would he pull a Diggs? So, we agree that you have to have "the" QB, in most circumstances. We agree that picking a QB isn't a sure thing, but you have the best shot if you have the first pick. A lot of the professional GMs get caught up in the underwear Olympics and physical attributes like arm strength, without apparently understanding the player's drive and determination to be great and to win at the top level. That's the characteristic that separates a Tom Brady or Russell Wilson or a Peyton Manning from a Ryan Leaf or a Jamarcus Russell. Also, remember that some owners jump into the middle of things, and once GMs and coaches start feeling some heat under their seats, they reach to pick a QB who is only a guy, not "the" guy. Anyway, the draft is usually the way teams end up with their top players, especially if they're in the top 10-15 picks. If we don't trade Kirk, they will either extend him, which doesn't make sense, at his age, or they will let him walk for nothing next year, and at best we will get a 3rd round comp pick the following year, IF someone signs him to be their starter. In the meantime, the Vikings will be middle of the pack again, and they will have to ransom multiple drafts to pick #1 or #2, or just hope that those drafting ahead of them screw things up. In terms of opportunity cost, it's better to trade Kirk. Nothing is a sure thing, except that Father Time always wins eventually.
|
|
|
Post by VikingBerserker on May 4, 2023 13:09:03 GMT -6
Easy to say this in hindsight but the point is multiple NFL teams used top 3 picks on those guys. So apparently professionals in the NFL aren't really that good at picking "sure things" when it comes to QB. I agree that I don't think Kirk has the "it factor" needed to win a QB. There's been a few QBs that still won (e.g. Dilfer) but it took very special circumstances. So absolutely I would happily take a crappy year if it meant getting a franchise qb to replace Kirk -- my only point is there's no guaranteed sure things especially at QB. It's one reason you don't normally see NFL teams tank a whole season where it used to be common in the NBA which is why they now have a lottery to pick the order. Best example I can think of was the "Suck for Luck" draft where Colts lost Manning and tanked but even that didn't really work due to injuries. Now if you're 2-10 and then trot out your backup QB to make sure you lose the last remaining games...that's more likely. So if you strike out, it'll take a couple years to know (or you keep drafting 1st round QBs). If you have multiple losing seasons (especially horrible seasons) that makes it harder to re-sign your top players and it is harder to get free agents. Would JJ want to stay is he has to go through a couple 2-15 seasons? Or would he pull a Diggs? So, we agree that you have to have "the" QB, in most circumstances. We agree that picking a QB isn't a sure thing, but you have the best shot if you have the first pick. A lot of the professional GMs get caught up in the underwear Olympics and physical attributes like arm strength, without apparently understanding the player's drive and determination to be great and to win at the top level. That's the characteristic that separates a Tom Brady or Russell Wilson or a Peyton Manning from a Ryan Leaf or a Jamarcus Russell. Also, remember that some owners jump into the middle of things, and once GMs and coaches start feeling some heat under their seats, they reach to pick a QB who is only a guy, not "the" guy. Anyway, the draft is usually the way teams end up with their top players, especially if they're in the top 10-15 picks. If we don't trade Kirk, they will either extend him, which doesn't make sense, at his age, or they will let him walk for nothing next year, and at best we will get a 3rd round comp pick the following year, IF someone signs him to be their starter. In the meantime, the Vikings will be middle of the pack again, and they will have to ransom multiple drafts to pick #1 or #2, or just hope that those drafting ahead of them screw things up. In terms of opportunity cost, it's better to trade Kirk. Nothing is a sure thing, except that Father Time always wins eventually. We agree on multiple things. I would argue everything you said should have also applied to (almost) all of those Rick Spielman years where he had 16-17 years and couldn't find a QB. I don't know what the teams plan really is -- but I assume finding (or not finding) a QB will define the success of Kwesi and O'Connell era. The only positive for right now is KOC got more out of Cousins than we've ever seen to date (IMO) so maybe he gets even more in 2023. I wouldn't hold my breath for them tanking on purpose (owners would lose $$). About the only way it'll happen is if Kirk gets hurt early and we're trotting Nick Mullens out to start multiple times.
|
|
2012mom
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 4,366
|
Post by 2012mom on May 4, 2023 13:17:54 GMT -6
So, we agree that you have to have "the" QB, in most circumstances. We agree that picking a QB isn't a sure thing, but you have the best shot if you have the first pick. A lot of the professional GMs get caught up in the underwear Olympics and physical attributes like arm strength, without apparently understanding the player's drive and determination to be great and to win at the top level. That's the characteristic that separates a Tom Brady or Russell Wilson or a Peyton Manning from a Ryan Leaf or a Jamarcus Russell. Also, remember that some owners jump into the middle of things, and once GMs and coaches start feeling some heat under their seats, they reach to pick a QB who is only a guy, not "the" guy. Anyway, the draft is usually the way teams end up with their top players, especially if they're in the top 10-15 picks. If we don't trade Kirk, they will either extend him, which doesn't make sense, at his age, or they will let him walk for nothing next year, and at best we will get a 3rd round comp pick the following year, IF someone signs him to be their starter. In the meantime, the Vikings will be middle of the pack again, and they will have to ransom multiple drafts to pick #1 or #2, or just hope that those drafting ahead of them screw things up. In terms of opportunity cost, it's better to trade Kirk. Nothing is a sure thing, except that Father Time always wins eventually. We agree on multiple things.Β I would argue everything you said should have also applied to (almost) all of those Rick Spielman years where he had 16-17 years and couldn't find a QB. I don't know what the teams plan really is -- but I assume finding (or not finding) a QB will define the success of Kwesi and O'Connell era.Β The only positive for right now is KOC got more out of Cousins than we've ever seen to date (IMO) so maybe he gets even more in 2023. Β I wouldn't hold my breath for them tanking on purpose (owners would lose $$).Β About the only way it'll happen is if Kirk gets hurt early and we're trotting Nick Mullens out to start multiple times. 100% agree that they won't trade Kirk. I'm just saying it's the best way to get a shot at getting "the guy" in next year's draft. I certainly do NOT want to see Mullens out there due to a Cousins injury. I don't EVER want to see our guys get hurt.
|
|