Veryoldschool

Will Cousins Play For The Skins In 2018

Will Cousins Be Back In 2018?  

206 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Will Cousins play for the Skins in 2018?

    • Yes, as part of a LTD.
      51
    • Yes, on a tag for a year
      43
    • No, the Skins tag him and manage to trade him
      30
    • No, the Skins let Cousins walk and he signs a LTD with another team
      82

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 12/22/2017 at 08:02 PM

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

 

But isnt this the entire argument in a nutshell? Are the Lions a better TEAM because they made Stafford the highest paid player in the league? Or would they have been better off letting him walk and building the rest of the team? That is where we are at this point. 

 

The thing is we act like these are hypothetical questions.  The Lions are a long running story of having high picks -- building a roster but failing to find the QB even though they attempted many times so they've mostly stunk pre Stafford.  They haven't won it all with Stafford but they are relevant and competitive every year versus being a laughing stock  They don't have to ask themselves well I wonder what would happen if we just built our team without the Qb per se -- they lived it, they remember it.  That's why I bet they signed Stafford to the richest Qb contract in the NFL.

 

The other team who has experienced much of what the Lions have = the Redskins.  Funny enough Vinny in a recent interview kept going you know we made some good moves but we never found a QB so that's why I am out of a job.

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

 

But isnt this the entire argument in a nutshell? Are the Lions a better TEAM because they made Stafford the highest paid player in the league? Or would they have been better off letting him walk and building the rest of the team? That is where we are at this point. 

 

In all honesty I dont know that it matters. What I took away from Kirk's "show" last week, and it was a show nothing more, is that he isnt staying here unless they completely break the bank for him. I want him back but not at the expense of the rest of the team.

Totally agree with this post. 

 

HTTR 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Bang said:

 

I think a lot of people don't recognize just how scarce talent at the position is.

 

I agree with this not to the degree you do which makes for a great conversation

 

 

Quote

 

there is such a scarcity of QB talent that there are only 32 jobs in the world, and all the scouts and GMs and incredibly wealthy NFL teams can't seem to find 15 of them that are good enough to even be competitive in the league.

 

This is where I think things are changing for the NFL in a good way.

 

Yes I know this could be temporary but for the sake of being transparent and using enough time as a measure I will go back to the 2012 draft when Kirk was drafted to make my point

 

QBs drafted since 2012

 

2012: Andrew Luck, Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins, Ryan Tannehill, Case Keenum

2013: No one

2014: Jimmy G, Teddy B, Derek Carr, Blake Bortles

2015: Jamies Winston, Marcus Mariota, 

2016: Jared Goff, Carson Wentz, Dak Prescott

2017: for the sake of arguement won’t list anyone yet but certainly could like Deshaun Watson and others 

 

This list is also leaving out guys like Jacoby Brissett, Bret Huntley, AJ McCarron, Landry Jones because while they may one day be one of the 32 starters the jury is still out on them.

 

Since Kirk Cousins was drafted there have been 13 starters drafted that have shown capable of leading an NFL team with another 5 to 10 other guys that the jury is still out on who very well could be on this list

 

Now the point of this is to show that the idea that QBs are unicorns that can’t be found by NFL teams lately looks very wrong to me.

 

Why are so many drafted players today finding success if we think finding a QB is an impossible task to do?

 

I think it’s because teams are finally cracking the QB code and actually able to spot talent today. I also think the rules of the NFL are so slanted to the QB today that it’s an easier game to play today vs other decades.

 

What ever the case the idea that QBs are unicorns just doesn’t make sense anymore to me with these results. I think that’s an old way of thinking that no longer applies and while it is not an easy thing to do it’s certainily not impossible anymore

 

Quote

 

We have one. And folks seem to think that is meaningless.

Based on just playing the odds, it will be years before we find another one.

 

~Bang

 

Or it could be much easier then we realize and this unicorn idea is an old out of date idea that we have been slow to rethink 

Edited by bobandweave
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't completely buy the argument that Kirk wants to be the highest paid player/qb in the league or that we cannot (continue to) build a competitive team around him.  

 

However, setting that aside, let's say we have one of two options here - build the best team we can with fewer resources and a good qb, or build the best team we can with more resources but a lesser qb.  

 

We've been through years and years (and years) of lesser qb play that we've tried to build around.  Aside from short lived, random,  middling success, it hasn't worked.  We've yet to try to build a team around a good qb though.  Sure, we started the process over the last couple of years, but we've been behind the 8 ball since we were missing multiple high draft picks from the trade up for Griffin.  This past season felt like the best roster we've had in a while, though the season went poorly due to various factors (injuries, SOS, Pryor and Dotson not living up to expectations).  With 3 years of good qb play we've been consistent - not good, but not awful either.  We've hovered around competitively mediocre... not something to be proud of, but probably better than we've had in the past couple/few decades.  

 

So, my point to all of this is - why not try to carry on with Cousins?  If we don't ever achieve anything more than competitive mediocrity, well, that's better than we've had (pre-Cousins), could be worse, and maybe was worth a shot.  If it blows up in our faces, and we're saddled with a poor team for the next few years because we've put too many resources towards Cousins... that would be pretty much par for the course, wouldn't it?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KDawg said:

The problem is that QBs demand a very high percentage of your cap. It doesn’t help you build a team around them. It hurts that opportunity.

 

and more..

See, to me, I don't think we have a need to go crazy spending money. 

I think we can sign Cousins to his deal and sign Brown to a modest 3 or 4 yr deal, and that should leave us enough to do some free agency movement.

I just don't think we have that much to do. 

IMO, the biggest and most glaring need is speed on the offense,, we haven't got any.

top priority for me is a RB and a WR and i think both can be covered in the draft. 
(I haven't really looked at this year's free agents,, but i don't think we are in any need of making any drastic moves. One name that is intriguing is Michael Crabtree, but  only if the price is right. 

 

we have so many players on IR that I think just getting them back gives us a big shot in the arm.

With Allen back, Brown resigned, Foster back, the defense should be fine. Before Allen and Foster's injuries the D was playing a whole lot better than they were once the bug hit.

We've drafted well for secondary,, we've got a very good crop of pass rushers with the return of Murphy to go with Kerrigan, Smith and Galette if he's back. 

Some of our depth guys got a whole lot better with extended action this year,, Lanier, Spaight..  i like what they bring and they can contribute in more meaningful roles based on what they showed us this year. 

Offensively we have holes.. but not insurmountable ones.

Get us a left guard. We have one in Long, but we can upgrade it.

Get us a WR for obvious reasons. get a Rb for obvious reasons.
Resign the QB and then what?

As i said in a post yesterday,, this rebuild is nearly complete.  Most of these players are under contract. This is a good roster for the most part, and i think we can win with it, plus a few small upgrades or adjustments.

 

So, i am no capologist, and i do not know the situation,,  but if Cousins and Brown get deals, how much leftover is that?

This isn't like it was ten+ years ago when we had to rebuild after every season.

 

~Bang

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

I agree with this not to the degree you do which makes for a great conversation

 

Now the point of this is to show that the idea that QBs are unicorns that can’t be found by NFL teams lately looks very wrong to me.

 

Why are so many drafted players today finding success if we think finding a QB is an impossible task to do?

 

 

 

I've given thought to this as well and generally agree. I don't believe it's as hard to find a QB as it once was.

 

I attribute this to 2 things. The recent rule changes in the NFL are definitely more QB friendly than they once were and more coaches are getting jobs based on their ability to develop the QB position than in the past.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, purbeast said:

 

Yeah I don't get it either.  This thought that we can just draft a rookie and groom him to win while, we also just upgrade defense like it's a simple formula for success, is something that I just don't understand in today's NFL.  Just take a look at the last 15 Super Bowl champs.  They all have QB's in the 1st/2nd tier you are talking about, with the majority of them being in the 1st tier.

 

The superbowls are like our Presidents lately. If your named Bush, Clinton, or Obama then the chances you’ve been the President is very very good. In the NFL if your name is Manning, Brady, or Roethlisberger chances are very good you’ve been winning most of the Superbowls.

 

Point is that just because the same names keep winning them does it mean that someone not named those names is not any good? Of course not. Simply judging QBs based on who wins championships is not a good way to judge them.

 

I personally think that teams can draft a QB and find success with them today is a true statement for one reason. Just posted the reason why. The results show it can be done. I can’t pretend that times are not changing in that regard. That idea is truer today then ever before and the list keeps growing

 

Thinking teams can’t compete with a recently drafted QB is silly to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

QBs drafted since 2012

 

2012: Andrew Luck, Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins, Ryan Tannehill, Case Keenum

2013: No one

2014: Jimmy G, Teddy B, Derek Carr, Blake Bortles

2015: Jamies Winston, Marcus Mariota, 

2016: Jared Goff, Carson Wentz, Dak Prescott

2017: for the sake of arguement won’t list anyone yet but certainly could like Deshaun Watson and others 

This list consists of 14 quarterbacks. 8 of those were drafted top 10 in the draft in their respected year.

 

The total number of quarterbacks drafted since 2012 is 68.

 

I personally will disagree that having a 20% chance of hitting on a QB in the draft, with a 9% chance of hitting on a QB not drafted top 10, is a good hit rate.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Or it could be much easier then we realize and this unicorn idea is an old out of date idea that we have been slow to rethink 

 

this really isn't anything unusual. Some of them, like Goff, are #1 overall picks with the benefit of a roster full of top 5 picks due to them being so bad all the time, and a hotshot young coach who should take the league by storm. (I do not discount McVeigh's part of the Rams success.)

Mariota, Winston.. the jury is still out.. history shows plenty of guys with all the potential and even a little success early, that bust and become average in a hurry.
Bridgewater looked like a young Qb who may or may not develop further..  nothing more to me. And now with his injury.. hard to say. Keenum, another guy on the list, he played very well this year.. i was impressed with how he managed the game, minimized risk and hit big plays while doing it. 

Prescott benefits greatly from the best OL in football and the best rushing attack. when he didn't have it, we saw a young QB play like a young QB. Carr came back to earth a bit.

Watson looks good, but who knows. With the way he plays the position, this injury could really hurt him, but i would not bet against him. Agreed, jury is out.

Of the list, (which don't misunderstand, i don't want to just nitpick it.) there's probably only Wentz who has as bbig a role in his team's instant turnaround. Wilson was great out of the chute, but had the league's best D to prop him up.

 

 

of the entire list, do we see the next group of elites? The Bonafide tier 1 HOF careerd guys?

(typically in any era you have about 4 HOF Qbs playing in the league.)

Maybe Wilson and Wentz. Maybe. 

 

I am against betting the house on a longshot that will set us back years if it doesn't work out, and wreck everything we've been building for seven years.

I say keep the bird in hand and remember why it's better than those two in the bush. 

 

We haven't been slow to rethink.

we had lightning in a bottle with RG3... and fell right back to earth almost immediately. 

We have developed our draft choice. I am for keeping him.

 

~Bang

Edited by Bang
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, of course he WANTS to be the highest paid player in the league.

 

I don't think his personality is the type where that is the only thing that matters. But who wouldn't want that if they could have it?

 

I think our offer has to match whatever he could get on the free market for him to stay. On one hand, he already has done well here, lives here, has the same coach, etc. and those are all factors for him to stay. On the other hand, the tomfoolery and hesitation by the office to sign him long-term makes him want a show of respect and desire to keep him here.

 

In my opinion it is a wash, and I think we have to meet what would be given by any other team.

 

If his starting point is the 34 million or whatever the franchise tag is, then it can't be justified keeping him because that would hamstring us BAD with cap going forward for at least a few years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone here is of the belief that it's literally impossible to find a QB in the draft.  It's also very possible to swing and miss.  Why take a chance to swing and miss when you already have one?  Even if you swing and hit a home run, that guy is going to want to be paid just like Cousins when his time comes.

 

Cousins is a guarantee.  A draft pick is always a risk.  I don't see any point in taking unnecessary risk.  He's been in the system 4 years and has progressed each season.  You've got an O-line with 3 studs that love to protect him.  Some weapons coming back in Thompson and hopefully Reed.  The running game needs work no matter who is behind center.

 

You lock Kirk up with a nice deal, 3 years guaranteed.  If after 2 years things are going nowhere, you draft a QB to play behind him for this third year and cut ties thereafter.  This is the worst case scenario and it's not the end of the world if this were to happen. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, purbeast said:

This list consists of 14 quarterbacks. 8 of those were drafted top 10 in the draft in their respected year.

 

The total number of quarterbacks drafted since 2012 is 68.

 

I personally will disagree that having a 20% chance of hitting on a QB in the draft, with a 9% chance of hitting on a QB not drafted top 10, is a good hit rate.

 

Compared to what? The hit rate on any first round pick is 30%. Truth is no college prospect is can’t miss no matter where they are drafted. The percentage goes down the further down the rounds you go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Compared to what? The hit rate on any first round pick is 30%. Truth is no college prospect is can’t miss no matter where they are drafted. The percentage goes down the further down the rounds you go

Compared to the 100% chance we have of having a good QB that we've had starting the past 3 years.

Edited by purbeast
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Bang said:

 

this really isn't anything unusual.

 

Good so I misunderstood you saying that teams can’t draft QBs and find team success with them. Clearly many teams have done this and are finding success with the drafted players. So why do you think we couldn’t be one of them?

 

Quote

 

I am against betting the house on a longshot that will set us back years if it doesn't work out, and wreck everything we've been building for seven years.

 

Thing to me about Kirk is that I openly question what it is that we have built with him during his time here we would lose if he leaves?

 

We have become an 8-8 team with him. Is that the end goal? Is that something only an elite QB could do for this team? Where are the accolades and memories with Kirk that makes anyone think couldn’t be replicated? I think a capable player like Alex Smith could replicate everything that Kirk’s done here and nothing more. 

 

Now don’t get me wrong, I do think that Kirk is a top half of the league QB and I do like him as a player and a person.

 

I am asking this only because of how low I actually think his ceiling is. The difference between a top 16 QB and a champion (Alex Smith vs Tom Brady) to me comes down to the player being able to take his god given talent and rise above it to greatness. Some have that and some do not. The thing most damning to Kirk is that he’s shown to be “good” not “great” and unable to lift those around him to greatness.

 

If the end goal is to be average 8-8 team then that fate to me is worse then being terrible. If a team is terrible they can at least draft a top guy. If a team is only average they cannot. If the goal is to be a champion then what makes after three seasons of watching him play that Kirk has “the it factor”? 

 

9-7

8-7-1

7-9

 

The trajectory of his ceiling is low. 8-8 is okay when your coming off years of 3-13 and 4-12 like we were but after a while it’s not enough. At least it shouldn’t be. 

 

The Mannings, Brady’s, Roethlisbergers of the world didn’t show a ceiling trajectory like this. Wentz like Peyton had a bad rookie season and then took off. Ben won right out the gate. Brady same.

 

I cant think of any QBs who started out 8-8 three seasons in a row and then went on to a championship. Sure he could be the first but after the Giants showed once again they have his number do you really think he will be the first guy to do this?

 

Quote

I say keep the bird in hand and remember why it's better than those two in the bush. 

 

We haven't been slow to rethink.

we had lightning in a bottle with RG3... and fell right back to earth almost immediately. 

We have developed our draft choice. I am for keeping him.

 

~Bang

 

Ugh I disliked the Griffin pick from day one. I believed he was too small to be a QB to rely on and sadly shown I was right. 

 

Teams make mistakes. Remember Andre Johnson the 1996 first round pick? The guy never played for us and was a horrible bust. We didn’t stop drafting offensive linemen in the first round because he busted. We can’t stop drafting QBs because Griffin busted as well

Edited by bobandweave
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@BatteredFanSyndrome in what way is Cousins a guarantee? A guarantee for what?

 

@Bang I’d agree we’re close to being a playoff team. But ultimately that’s not the goal. TE is a question mark, WR is a question mark, RB is a question mark. OL depth is a question mark. Improved DL play is needed. Safety help is needed. Could use an upgrade at ILB next to Brown, and if Brown isn’t back we could upgrade both spots with Foster being a fringe starter guy. CB is okay. 

 

I think were further away than some believe. But closer than others believe. 

 

Question is: Does the money spent on Kirk help us elsewhere? And the follow up is, and has to be, is there a viable option to replace Kirk that would be cheap enough to sign along with at least one other quality player?

 

Notice it’s not, “is there someone available better than Kirk”. It’s is there a viable option that fits within the threshold of keeping others and adding a strong piece in conjunction.

 

And that’s where I’m squarely paused. I’d have a better answer if I was part of the FO, but I sure as hell wouldn’t be sharing it :ols:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, purbeast said:

Compared to the 100% chance we have of having a good QB that we've had starting the past 3 years.

 

Who has led the team to what? What has Kirk done to make you think he has what it takes to take us to the promised land? 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, KDawg said:

@BatteredFanSyndrome in what way is Cousins a guarantee? A guarantee for what?

 

@Bang I’d agree we’re close to being a playoff team. But ultimately that’s not the goal. TE is a question mark, WR is a question mark, RB is a question mark. OL depth is a question mark. Improved DL play is needed. Safety help is needed. Could use an upgrade at ILB next to Brown, and if Brown isn’t back we could upgrade both spots with Foster being a fringe starter guy. CB is okay. 

 

I think were further away than some believe. But closer than others believe. 

 

I lurk and enjoy the posts you make about the areas of the team that need improvement in other threads. Please keep doing that.

 

I just wonder if we all realize what areas of the team are in most dire need of improvement with a laundry list like you posted there. To me the two areas of the team that most need improvement are

 

1. That run stuffing linemen on defense. I was upset that Logan from the Eagles wasn’t added last season. DVOA shows that we are in the best in the league at defending the pass but bottom 5 teams at stopping the opposing rusher. When the Jaguars traded for Marcell Darius I was heated for days. Everywhere he goes he shuts down the opposing rusher and immediately improved the Jags defense. We need that guy more then ever 

 

2. A capable good Running back. Team stats since Jay came here show that we have progressively gotten worse and worse in team rush yards as the years progress. This season Kirk led the team in rushing TDs which is unacceptable to me. We don’t need a retread like some have suggested in Crowell we need a young guy who can rush the football

 

Its my opinion that if we find these two pieces we would have won enough games last season to make the playoffs

 

5 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

Question is: Does the money spent on Kirk help us elsewhere? And the follow up is, and has to be, is there a viable option to replace Kirk that would be cheap enough to sign along with at least one other quality player?

 

I think the answer to the first question is No. Paying Kirk 28 million hurts them signing other players. The answer to the follow up is yes. His name is Alex Smith. Why Smith? He throws very few picks, he throws for a ton of yards, he doesn’t need elite receivers to get those yards, and he would cost only 17 million this season. Just on the money saved from not tagging Kirk I can see them signing a good receiver with that money like a Jarvis Landry improving that area of need. 

 

Now with that said I don’t think Alex Smith is going to take this team to the championship. But then again neither has Kirk. But if you had a choice of Smith and Jarvis or Kirk I think the answer is the twofer

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, KDawg said:

@BatteredFanSyndrome in what way is Cousins a guarantee? A guarantee for what?

 

Guarantee that he can play, run Jays offense and stay healthy.

 

Whether you insert a rookie or FA, all of those minus possibly stay healthy...they are all unknowns.  Unknowns that most likely will not strike lightning in a bottle quickly, if ever.

 

Why invest the amount of money and time we've already spent on Cousins just to start over with someone else?

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL changes so much year to year though that the ramifications of Kirk leaving could mean disaster for 2018, but then meaningless for 2019, 2020, etc etc.....we simply don't have the ability to forecast what the Redskins look like minus Kirk Cousins. 

 

Look at the Cowboys & Dak Prescott.  The year he was drafted he was an after-thought. Then Romo goes down and the Cowboys season is supposed to be certain disaster.  As it turns out, the roster was built well enough to mask his weaknesses and the Cowboys go on a tear and NFL experts are making all sorts of proclamations about the guy.  Then the very next season their word is turned upside down again when it's realized he is not that good.

 

Any absolute statements about what this team will or won't be without Cousins as the QB are premature at this point because it's not as if his eventual replacement is necessarily even on the roster at the present time.  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Guarantee that he can play, run Jays offense and stay healthy.

 

Whether you insert a rookie or FA, all of those minus possibly stay healthy...they are all unknowns.  Unknowns that most likely will not strike lightning in a bottle quickly, if ever.

 

Why invest the amount of money and time we've already spent on Cousins just to start over with someone else?

 

 

 

 

 

Because the team has mucked up the works with him and now he is going to cost as much as it would cost to sign a small village of androids and give them each a Lamborghini. 

 

Again, you have to weigh options and see what the possibilities are with either scenario. There literally has to be about 700 scenarios that could play out in the FOs mind and they need to have a plan. 

 

Keeping Kirk, while improving areas of need would be an outstanding scenario. Is that realistic? Not sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

26 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

The NFL changes so much year to year though that the ramifications of Kirk leaving could mean disaster for 2018, but then meaningless for 2019, 2020, etc etc.....we simply don't have the ability to forecast what the Redskins look like minus Kirk Cousins. 

 

Look at the Cowboys & Dak Prescott.  The year he was drafted he was an after-thought. Then Romo goes down and the Cowboys season is supposed to be certain disaster.  As it turns out, the roster was built well enough to mask his weaknesses and the Cowboys go on a tear and NFL experts are making all sorts of proclamations about the guy.  Then the very next season their word is turned upside down again when it's realized he is not that good.

 

Any absolute statements about what this team will or won't be without Cousins as the QB are premature at this point because it's not as if his eventual replacement is necessarily even on the roster at the present time.  

 

Remeber the Falcons the year the owner cleaned house after the head coach quit.  That team was picked to win about 2 games but they drafted Matt Ryan and made the playoffs his rookie year.

 

Anything can happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SprintBomb said:

Ironic how Cousins is that exception to the rule.

Yep. Add him to the list. Then compare that to the list of QBs drafted after the first round that never did anything and you'd see how hard it is to hit in the late rounds. . 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jschuck12001 said:

 

 

Remeber the Falcons the year the owner cleaned house after the head coach quit.  That team was picked to win about 2 games but they drafted Matt Ryan and made the playoffs his rookie year.

 

Anything can happen.

 

Right, and it's not as if I am telling everyone the same thing will happen here, I am simply saying we have no idea because NFL teams are like math equations. There isn't a magic formula that transcends. Yes, there are probabilities, but no absolutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bobandweave said:

 

Good so I misunderstood you saying that teams can’t draft QBs and find team success with them. Clearly many teams have done this and are finding success with the drafted players. So why do you think we couldn’t be one of them?

 

 

Thing to me about Kirk is that I openly question what it is that we have built with him during his time here we would lose if he leaves?

 

We have become an 8-8 team with him. Is that the end goal? Is that something only an elite QB could do for this team? Where are the accolades and memories with Kirk that makes anyone think couldn’t be replicated? I think a capable player like Alex Smith could replicate everything that Kirk’s done here and nothing more. 

 

Now don’t get me wrong, I do think that Kirk is a top half of the league QB and I do like him as a player and a person.

 

I am asking this only because of how low I actually think his ceiling is. The difference between a top 16 QB and a champion (Alex Smith vs Tom Brady) to me comes down to the player being able to take his god given talent and rise above it to greatness. Some have that and some do not. The thing most damning to Kirk is that he’s shown to be “good” not “great” and unable to lift those around him to greatness.

 

If the end goal is to be average 8-8 team then that fate to me is worse then being terrible. If a team is terrible they can at least draft a top guy. If a team is only average they cannot. If the goal is to be a champion then what makes after three seasons of watching him play that Kirk has “the it factor”? 

 

9-7

8-7-1

7-9

 

The trajectory of his ceiling is low. 8-8 is okay when your coming off years of 3-13 and 4-12 like we were but after a while it’s not enough. At least it shouldn’t be. 

 

The Mannings, Brady’s, Roethlisbergers of the world didn’t show a ceiling trajectory like this. Wentz like Peyton had a bad rookie season and then took off. Ben won right out the gate. Brady same.

 

I cant think of any QBs who started out 8-8 three seasons in a row and then went on to a championship. Sure he could be the first but after the Giants showed once again they have his number do you really think he will be the first guy to do this?

 

 

Ugh I disliked the Griffin pick from day one. I believed he was too small to be a QB to rely on and sadly shown I was right. 

 

Teams make mistakes. Remember Andre Johnson the 1996 first round pick? The guy never played for us and was a horrible bust. We didn’t stop drafting offensive linemen in the first round because he busted. We can’t stop drafting QBs because Griffin busted as well

 

 

the Ben, Brady, Brees comparisons are where i tend to get lost in this debate.. these are hall of fame players, and I think saying that because they are what they are, then he must be what they are or it's a knock on him. It's not reasonable to keep fishing for Hall of Fame QBs.. they come along for a team once a generation, if they're lucky. Last one we had was Sonny Jurgensen, and he never won a playoff game.

Comparisons to say,. well, who has done this or that... they take nothing into account for the multitude of contextual things that make each team's season unique to that team. No comparison is apples to apples,, none of them.

In taking this year, I am sorry, but i cannot look at it like a 7-9 year as if we did not suffer injuries at the rate we did. And aside from that, Cousins (and seemingly Jay) doesn't have any input on if the FO will trade out all of his targets for inferior players or if they decide he can go with junk at RB that wouldn't start anywhere else in the league. Those are the cards he's dealt.

(to answer the question, though.. Joe Thiesmann had one season in 4 over .500 and was 6-10 // 8-8 in the seasons directly prior to him winning a Super Bowl and then becoming the MVP the next year. Drew Brees was 7-9 and 8-8  leading up to his winning the Super Bowl. So it's not at all unheard of. Probably wthe reason it seems so rare now is because In the last 15 years there have been exactly 3 Super Bowls not won by Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Manning, Manning  or Roethlisberger. The Super Bowl has been dominated by three or four QBs for a long time now.

 

I'm not saying we don't stop drafting QBs.. but we have no need to replace the one we have unless we stupidly show him the door.

Of those QBs who are dominating the last 15 Super Bowls, how many of them saw potential replacements drafted high in their fifth year?

 

~Bang

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.