Serious Question: Do you regret letting Cousins go?

[CjSuAvE22]

15 hours ago, SkinsFanMania said:

Drew Brees

Ok so we have drew brees and kirk cousins in the same company and you are telling me kirk isnt worth the money??? Kirks stats trump drew brees in his first 4 years, but most skins are delusional and the argument is “kirk will always put up stats but will never win” he puts up stats because hes good at his job nfl football is never a one man show and teams get hot a hot kirk cousins led team can go deep into the playoffs and maybe even win a super bowl and you cant deny that...the reason this thread is still here is because letting cousins walk was the biggest mistake of Allen/Snyder they thought they were big brains bringing in Another aging vet qb that was andy reids trash....and now we STINK i hope this thread stays open forever just so when brucie comes to the forums and he def does it haunts him that we are still talking about what could have been...

[Skinsinparadise]

9 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

I don’t think it’s purely a function of his supporting cast, I believe Kirk has established a good floor and won’t ignore that fact. For Kirk, it just hasn’t translated into double digit win seasons or even 1 spectacular season, you know? He’s always middling in average to great, as does his teams. Last year was a huge indictment on his resume and has many non believers in Minnesota, it’s not just here any longer. Maybe this is the year he delivers on a special year and his stock turns to bullish stock breaking his ceiling to date. 

 

If he only had one spectacular season and a double digit win season.  Kirk is sooooo far away from both?   Well Kirk can dream, I guess.  😀  One thing I kept saying about Alex is he IMO (and plenty of others) played "meh" but it's the first year in a system, give him another season in the system/team and he should improve.  I said that many times.  To me that same point applied to Kirk.  He had a good not great year in his first season in Minny but I didn't look at it as one and done.  Was curious about how the movie preceded. 

 

Kirk might not reach a double digit season or monster stats but for that to happen, he'd have to collapse in the last 5 games.  Is that possible?  Sure.  Will see.  The one point I concede is you want to see him finish.  It's my same thought on Dak who I've given a hard time about his ceiling like you do with Kirk.  I want to see him finish before saying am wrong.   But I am open minded that I could be wrong. 

 

Kirk wasn't in MVP talk while he was here.  He is in MVP talk (including from Vegas) now because he's winning and having that spectacular season that you say keeps eluding him.   The only question in my mind is does he keep it up?  Seattle for example is up soon and they have foiled him big time in his career.  Bears' defense have been tough on him, too.   Big hurdles on the horizon for him. 

 

9 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

I’ll concede this point—I have framed my opinion of Kirk as if it’s not possible for him to become elite. I do think there’s potential for him to have an outlier year or two that are elite. Do I think it’s likely? No. I don’t believe this years been elite when looking at the season as a whole and game to game.

 

 I recall you after his first two games in a jocular way talking about how now can we all agree that Kirk stinks or something like that on the Haskins thread.  So I presume you are hanging on that to this point.   Kirk even here has started slowly, ironically typically its been the first two games or at least it was in one season that I recall.  He's heated up big since.  QBs have bad games.  It's not like a straight line pointing up, right up Mt. Everest, etc.  Even Aaron Rodgers and Brady mix in a stinker or mediocre outing.  Not that am comparing Kirk to either dude.   I am just saying bad games happen even for the best Qbs.  Kirk is entitled, too.  Now a whole bunch of bad games isn't acceptable and yes there is still time for that to happen.  Will see. 

[Rex Tomb]

OMG this thread is so pointless.  Kirk didn't want to be here anyway.  It takes two to tango and Kirk wasn't dancing.  Instead he soaked us for as much money as he could possibly get out of us before moving on.  He was completely disingenuous and everyone knew it. 

 

I also don't want a "process oriented" QB.  He has yet to beat a good defense.  The Cowboys without Vander Esch don't count.

[SkinsFTW]

Because given the choice, so many of the other Qbs would actually choose to be the leader of the leagues largest dumpster fire.

 

Wake up buddy!!

 

In reality NOBODY WANTS TO ****ING BE HERE!!!

 

Kirk just happened to be the one with the lottery ticket issued to him by OUR morons.

[ananoman]

4 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

Because given the choice, so many of the other Qbs would actually choose to be the leader of the leagues largest dumpster fire.

 

Wake up buddy!!

 

In reality NOBODY WANTS TO ****ING BE HERE!!!

 

Kirk just happened to be the one with the lottery ticket issued to him by OUR morons.

 

Kirk probably thanks God every day for what Dan/Bruce did for him.  God is Good!

[SkinsFTW]

2 hours ago, ananoman said:

 

 

 God is Good!

 

Apparently dumbasses like Dan and Bruce were put on this planet to prove that point. They are the villains in the story lol.

 

Either that or they are just epic idiots.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

20 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

Because given the choice, so many of the other Qbs would actually choose to be the leader of the leagues largest dumpster fire.

 

Wake up buddy!!

 

In reality NOBODY WANTS TO ****ING BE HERE!!!

 

Kirk just happened to be the one with the lottery ticket issued to him by OUR morons.

 

Most of us see this FO-owner as a clown show and toxic yet we are just fans and it doesn't affect our livelihoods.  We can tune this stuff out whenever we please.   The Redskins don't write our paycheck.   Yet some blame players who echo that same sentiment who actually have to deal with the clown show directly.

 

if a player who didn't even grow up a Redskins fan comes here and likewise sees it as a clown show and according to some is trashed some in the negotiations, and is mocked in a ridiculous press conference by the team president and is then supposed to just shrug it all off and take if anything a pay cut to endure the clown show and grin and bear it just because?  😀  Let alone turn down an opportunity to go to a winning organization?

[Darrell Green Fan]

14 hours ago, 4Redskins said:

I don't really miss him. He may have kept us out of the gutter (like 1-9), but he was never going to elevate the team to a championship level. Not worth the money to stay a 7-9 to 9-7 team. I thought we were better off with Alex Smith...that didn't work out, of course, but you can never predict injuries like that. I wish Cousins luck with the Vikings, but I'm not shedding any tears because he's gone (there are too many other things with the Redskins worth crying over).

 

You can't predict injuries but you sure can predict the future performances of a QB at the end of the line. He was nothing more than another Mark Brunnel. I got so tired of hearing "we were 6-3 with Alex" which of course totally ignored the obvious that he was nothing more than a dreaded game manager and made very few plays. And of course he was only going to get worse as he got older..

Kirk clearly had big game issues and I highly doubt he will ever play in a Super Bowl. it's hard to say if he will end up being worth the money. Last year obviously he was not, but as we kept arguing the longer that contract goes the higher salaries for starting QBs go.  So in a few years it won't look so out of line, if he continues to play the way he has this season yeah he's worth the contract. 

 

As posted when he was the QB we were at least competitive, without him we are a laughing stock.  The haters want to point out how the Vikes regressed from the NFC Championship Game after he arrived, as if the QB was the entire difference and everything else remained the same from the previous season.  If we are playing that game the Redskins were 24-23-1 with Kirk, no defense or running game, and 15-43 in the 2 years before he became the starter and the 2 years since he left. 

[DJHJR86]

17 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

I got so tired of hearing  "we were 6-3 with Alex" which of course totally ignored the obvious that he was nothing more than a dreaded game manager and made very few plays. And of course he was only going to get worse as he got older..

 

I've found that the best way to shut down the "we were 6-3 and would've won the division!" talk is to point out the 2008 season.  The team record through the first 10 games was 6-4, just like 2018.  And:

QB1: 198/307, 64.5%, 2,122 yards, 9 TD, 3 INT, 7.06 AY/A, 90.3 Passer Rating

 

QB2: 205/328, 62.5%, 2,180 yards, 10 TD, 5 INT, 6.57 AY/A, 85.7 Passer Rating

 

QB1 was Jason Campbell.  QB2 was Alex Smith.

 

Does anyone want to guess what the common denominator was in both years?  In games when Adrian Peterson rushed for over 90 yards (when Smith was healthy), the team was 5-0, and 1-4 when he didn't.  In 2008 (in the first 10 games), when Clinton Portis rushed for over 90 yards, the team was 5-1, and 1-3 when he didn't.

[Darrell Green Fan]

7 minutes ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

I've found that the best way to shut down the "we were 6-3 and would've won the division!" talk is to point out the 2008 season.  The team record through the first 10 games was 6-4, just like 2018.  And:

QB1: 198/307, 64.5%, 2,122 yards, 9 TD, 3 INT, 7.06 AY/A, 90.3 Passer Rating

 

QB2: 205/328, 62.5%, 2,180 yards, 10 TD, 5 INT, 6.57 AY/A, 85.7 Passer Rating

 

QB1 was Jason Campbell.  QB2 was Alex Smith.

 

Does anyone want to guess what the common denominator was in both years?  In games when Adrian Peterson rushed for over 90 yards (when Smith was healthy), the team was 5-0, and 1-4 when he didn't.  In 2008 (in the first 10 games), when Clinton Portis rushed for over 90 yards, the team was 5-1, and 1-3 when he didn't.

 

I will never understand why Kirk got so much hate here. He was the only thing close to a competent QB this team has had in 30 years.  He didn't want to play here?  Well can you blame him?  

 

[DJHJR86]

11 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

I will never understand why Kirk got so much hate here. He was the only thing close to a competent QB this team has had in 30 years.  He didn't want to play here?  Well can you blame him?  

 

A small, but very vocal, portion of the fan base never gave Kirk a chance because he supplanted the "chosen one" as the starter.  These same people are the ones who continue to prop up Alex for the simple fact that he wasn't Kirk and that Alex "wanted to be here".  Which...is an odd defense considering how much of a dumpster fire this organization is.  Anyone "wanting to be here" would make me question their intelligence.  

[Darrell Green Fan]

1 hour ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

A small, but very vocal, portion of the fan base never gave Kirk a chance because he supplanted the "chosen one" as the starter.  These same people are the ones who continue to prop up Alex for the simple fact that he wasn't Kirk and that Alex "wanted to be here".  Which...is an odd defense considering how much of a dumpster fire this organization is.  Anyone "wanting to be here" would make me question their intelligence.  

 

I'm not so sure it's people who loved Griffin. Most saw that season ending pick to the Giants and just couldn't forgive him. It's as if he was caught throwing the game or something.  Some called him greedy which is laughable because EVERY NFL player is "greedy".  As they should be.

 

He choked, he does that. But that does not take away from the fact that he was better than what they had in the past and surely better than what they have now. 

[DJHJR86]

2 hours ago, DJHJR86 said:

Does anyone want to guess what the common denominator was in both years?  In games when Adrian Peterson rushed for over 90 yards (when Smith was healthy), the team was 5-0, and 1-4 when he didn't.  In 2008 (in the first 10 games), when Clinton Portis rushed for over 90 yards, the team was 5-1, and 1-3 when he didn't.

 

And guess what happened in the final 6 games of both seasons?  In 2008, Portis rushed for over 90 yards once in a win, and the team went 1-4 when he didn't.  Last year, in the final 6 games, when Peterson rushed over 90+ yards, the team was 0-2 (one of those games includes the 90+ TD run when Sanchez was the QB for context), and the team was 1-3 in games when he didn't.  We weren't playoff bound last year with a healthy Smith.  It was an 8-8 team at best.

[Veryoldschool]

12 hours ago, zskins said:

 

Let me break it down for you. No team will put a 1st round selected QB on the bench over a 4th round picked QB. It doesn't even matter what happened years later. Don't tell me you were Kirk whisper and would have had Kirk starting in 2012 over RG3...lol

 

Bust in Canton talk for Kirk? Your love for Kirk is blinding you old man. 

 

 

 

I told people in 2012 after the Cleveland game that Kirk would beat out Griffin eventually.  I never bought into Griffin because I don't believe in running quarterbacks especially fragile ones.  Whereas with Cousins it was clear from his first performance on the field in Cleveland that he could be a starter in the NFL.  Now Cousins is playing with a pretty good supporting cast although I have concerns for their pass defense.  If Kirk manages to win a couple of Super Bowls for Minnesota he'll get a yellow jacket, and the NeverKirkers will have to live with it.  It's tough to win a couple of Super Bowls but Cousins has the talent and a chance with Minnesota.

 

As for Griffin, he might have made a good receiver before he got hurt but instead, he is just another one of Dan Snyder's ridiculous mistakes.  Maybe he'll be one of the answers on Jeopardy one day.  I'll take NFL busts for $500...... 

[Mania]

3 hours ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

Ok so we have drew brees and kirk cousins in the same company and you are telling me kirk isnt worth the money??? Kirks stats trump drew brees in his first 4 years, but most skins are delusional and the argument is “kirk will always put up stats but will never win” he puts up stats because hes good at his job nfl football is never a one man show and teams get hot a hot kirk cousins led team can go deep into the playoffs and maybe even win a super bowl and you cant deny that...the reason this thread is still here is because letting cousins walk was the biggest mistake of Allen/Snyder they thought they were big brains bringing in Another aging vet qb that was andy reids trash....and now we STINK i hope this thread stays open forever just so when brucie comes to the forums and he def does it haunts him that we are still talking about what could have been...

really you are going to go by stats when it's a totally different era.  

 

I don't like to compare QB's of different eras, so when people ask me who they think the greatest QB of all time is, I won't make that statement, because the game was different in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 00, and even 10s.   The rules have changed to make it much easier for offenses and I disagree that Brees stats weren't as good as Kirk's if you look at the entire picture.   I'll say it again, when he was a Redskin he wasn't beating the good teams in this league.   I would have paid him 20m per, but not 28m per, not two years ago.  

[wit33]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

If he only had one spectacular season and a double digit win season.  Kirk is sooooo far away from both?   Well Kirk can dream, I guess.  😀  One thing I kept saying about Alex is he IMO (and plenty of others) played "meh" but it's the first year in a system, give him another season in the system/team and he should improve.  I said that many times.  To me that same point applied to Kirk.  He had a good not great year in his first season in Minny but I didn't look at it as one and done.  Was curious about how the movie preceded. 

Do we disagree that it would help Kirk’s status if he were to have a double digit win season or how about a 12 win type season with elite numbers? I’m not saying this in a condescending way, I just feel we’re not that far a part, but you are choosing to toss me to the other extreme with Kirk. I truly believe Kirk is a good QB, but must accomplish more to reach level of great. 
 

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Kirk might not reach a double digit season or monster stats but for that to happen, he'd have to collapse in the last 5 games.  Is that possible?  Sure.  Will see.  The one point I concede is you want to see him finish.  It's my same thought on Dak who I've given a hard time about his ceiling like you do with Kirk.  I want to see him finish before saying am wrong.   But I am open minded that I could be wrong. 
 

I like the Dak comparison. 

 

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Kirk wasn't in MVP talk while he was here.  He is in MVP talk (including from Vegas) now because he's winning and having that spectacular season that you say keeps eluding him.   The only question in my mind is does he keep it up?  Seattle for example is up soon and they have foiled him big time in his career.  Bears' defense have been tough on him, too.   Big hurdles on the horizon for him. 

Okay, we can agree to disagree on this season being spectacular. With that said, I’ll concede this season is trending in direction of being spectacular, but the first four weeks were incredibly bad and had many in Minnesota (not DC “haters”) questioning their investment, coupled with the disappointment of last season. 
 

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 I recall you after his first two games in a jocular way talking about how now can we all agree that Kirk stinks or something like that on the Haskins thread.  So I presume you are hanging on that to this point.   Kirk even here has started slowly, ironically typically its been the first two games or at least it was in one season that I recall.  He's heated up big since.  QBs have bad games.  It's not like a straight line pointing up, right up Mt. Everest, etc.  Even Aaron Rodgers and Brady mix in a stinker or mediocre outing.  Not that am comparing Kirk to either dude.   I am just saying bad games happen even for the best Qbs.  Kirk is entitled, too.  Now a whole bunch of bad games isn't acceptable and yes there is still time for that to happen.  Will see. 

 

You’re choosing to pin me to extremes and doing so with a random reflection of me saying Kirk “stinks”. I dont feel that way about Kirk, so I’m confident I didn’t say that   and certainly didn’t say “stinks”. I’m sure you’re paraphrasing and choosing the word stinks to bolster your point though, which is fine. 
 

Kirk is a good QB. I used to believe he was above average. I no longer feel this way. Kirk has the potential to put up elite numbers and it may happen this year. I do not think Kirk is elite.

[88Comrade2000]

This thread should be moved to tailgate. Who cares about our former QB. Wish him well. Kirk is the past.

 

Haskins is present for now and maybe the future.

[Thinking Skins]

17 hours ago, wit33 said:

It was never just about Kirk the QB for me— the overall market NFL teams were paying average to above guys was crazy (which is beginning to correct itself a bit). I dont like average to above guys taking up more than 8% (Is even prefer a rookie deal or paying 3-5% to a vet) of the cap or so. Sure, I own not being a fan of Kirk the dude, but recognize he was a huge contributor to the team being average during his reign and as you know, I valued being in the playoff hunt those years. 

 

I think this is a very good point. While I don't villanize Bruce's decisions as much as some here on the board, I don't like the way he treated the Kirk situation. That said, all we have to do is look at some other situations right now like Colin Kap (even before the protests), Cam newton, Goff, Carr, Stafford, and a few other guys. They got big deals but they were based on the potential of the QB and their continued rise to ascension and that rise flattened out in these cases. Has Kirk's, I don't really know because I don't follow him as much but it was a legit question when he only had 1 good season and even after the 2 years of really good stats but not winning there were legit questions about him. Sure Minny paid him but he's only now starting to get some of the monkeys of his career off his back. 

 

it would be great to have him as QB right now, but I can't say that we'd be anything like the Vikings right now. I'd assume we'd probably still be floating around the 8-8 records, probably more similar to Philly, Chicago, Tennessee, Carolina, the Rams, Oakland or the Chargers. Sure thats better than right now but we'd definitely have buyers remorse if Kirk was putting up 5000 yard seasons but only winning 8 games. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Rdskns2000 said:

This thread should be moved to tailgate. Who cares about our former QB. Wish him well. Kirk is the past.

 

Haskins is present for now and maybe the future.

 

The Haskins thread has plenty of play.  So people can come and go to either thread as they please.  I know I do.  To me the topic of Kirk is relevant for one reason -- Bruce.

Haskins is the only thing that can save this.  And I hope he does vindicate things.   How long can one organization have bad luck at the Qb position?  You figure the law of averages has to kick in eventually?  😀

 

But I am also with @Veryoldschool 's point which it's almost comical to say good riddance Kirk, glad he's gone, considering what's transpired.  So it should close because the verdict is in at least for now.   We are clearly not better with him gone while he has an MVP caliber season.  We are paying more money at the QB position than the vikings.  It's an epic failure.  It's not really a debate at all.  so if the thread should close on a high, I got no problem with it.  😀

 

 

 

 

[Ghost of]

Didn't Kirk have his first fourth quarter comeback this year?  

 

Isn't that a little late in the game?  Wasn't the knock on him that he'd have some good games and either frontrun or pad stats at the end of a loss but he'd blow the pass that would have led to a game-tying/lead-taking score?  Didn't he show poorly in almost every single big game the Redskins have? Is it not a little strange to be competitive enough to have a big game, but somehow only blame the rest of the team when the QB lays an egg or chokes?

 

This notion that there's unreasonable hate towards Kirk is, frankly, an amazing shift in narrative.  He earned every bit of the criticism through his failures on field, and I still maintain that with him, we'd only be mediocre enough to not make the hard choices.  He's not a generational talent, he's not good going off script (which is sort of the key for the QBs who elevate their team) and we wouldn't be a great team with him.  Losing him, and it causing the firing of Gruden and then Allen is the key to this.

[DJHJR86]

12 minutes ago, Ghost of Nibbs McPimpin said:

Didn't Kirk have his first fourth quarter comeback this year?  

 

Didn't Kirk lead the NFL in 4th quarter comebacks when he was on the Redskins in 2017?  Why yes he did.  Because the team around him sucked.  Now that he's on a better team, naturally, his 4th quarter comeback numbers would be lower.  

[Fat Stupid Loser]

2 hours ago, SkinsFanMania said:

really you are going to go by stats when it's a totally different era.  

 

I don't like to compare QB's of different eras, so when people ask me who they think the greatest QB of all time is, I won't make that statement, because the game was different in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 00, and even 10s.   The rules have changed to make it much easier for offenses and I disagree that Brees stats weren't as good as Kirk's if you look at the entire picture.   I'll say it again, when he was a Redskin he wasn't beating the good teams in this league.   I would have paid him 20m per, but not 28m per, not two years ago.  

And for your cunning frugalness, you would have Case Keenum. You're from the Bruce tree of FO wizardry.

[ClaytoAli]

8 minutes ago, Fat Stupid Loser said:

And for your cunning frugalness, you would have Case Keenum. You're from the Bruce tree of FO wizardry.

oooooo Burn!

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, wit33 said:

Do we disagree that it would help Kirk’s status if he were to have a double digit win season or how about a 12 win type season with elite numbers? I’m not saying this in a condescending way, I just feel we’re not that far a part, but you are choosing to toss me to the other extreme with Kirk. I truly believe Kirk is a good QB, but must accomplish more to reach level of great. 

 

My best analogy is its like watching the Endgame, Terminator, Top Gun and saying you know I'll endorse it once I see some action in the movie.   

 

So yeah on one front of the argument you do seem extreme (though not overall) to me when he's clearly deep in the process of accomplishing everything you say he's missing.  He's 2 wins from double digit wins and in the midst of an elite season.  People just don't causally throw names (especially Vegas placing betting odds) for an MVP season without some serious great play taking place.

 

Not saying you are saying otherwise.  But the conversation isn't here we go again.  What season does Kirk not get MVP hype in a season for 5 games to go?  Yawn.  Pick it up Kirk. 

 

Now I do get the narrative that it could fall apart.  He has three of his nemesis teams up in the next 5 games.  GB, Chicago, Seattle.  It can fall apart.  But to me the argument isn't can he pick it up because it isn't an elite season.  It's obviously an elite season if this pace continues.  The wild card is does it continue?  I genuinely don't know.  I got the same thought about Dak which is lets see but in his case am rooting against him.  😀

 

 

2 hours ago, wit33 said:

I like the Dak comparison. 

 

I like it too because I pride myself on not being stuck on an opinion.  Dak right now is making my opinion look silly.    And it doesn't bother me aside from he's a Cowboy.  It's football.  It's hard to predict.  We are not scouts.   Our egos shouldn't feel bruised.    I can find old posts on mine that make me look like a moron on certain players and conversely a genius.  Up and down like everyone else here.  

 

2 hours ago, wit33 said:

Okay, we can agree to disagree on this season being spectacular. With that said, I’ll concede this season is trending in direction of being spectacular, but the first four weeks were incredibly bad and had many in Minnesota (not DC “haters”) questioning their investment, coupled with the disappointment of last season. 

 

OK but they weren't incredibly bad.  The first and third game were ironically classic Alex Smith style type of games.  He didn't throw the ball much.  He managed it, 70-80% completion rate when he threw.   And they won those 2 games and handily.  He didn't throw a pick in either game.  Tough to see how those games were incredibly bad while you in particular tout the same style with Alex and how we underrate it?  We don't need fancy stats.  Just don't make mistakes and just win baby.  That's ok for Alex but not Kirk -- the bar is higher for him?   I am only bringing up Alex because you push him more than most.  

 

He did play poorly in 2 of those games -- GB and Chicago but not all 4 of them as you say.  But my bad for saying the first 2.  It wasn't the first 2, I should have just said 2 early on.

 

2 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

You’re choosing to pin me to extremes and doing so with a random reflection of me saying Kirk “stinks”. I dont feel that way about Kirk, so I’m confident I didn’t say that   and certainly didn’t say “stinks”. I’m sure you’re paraphrasing and choosing the word stinks to bolster your point though, which is fine. 

 

When I got some time, I'll look for the post.  My point isn't that you are on the extreme spectrum I flat out said to you yesterday that you aren't and complemented you on that front. 

 

But, I recall some giddy posts on the Haskins thread early in the season and you posted among them about Kirk's rough start and you alluding to something to the effect of I told everyone.  Maybe you didn't say he stinks but it was in the context of Kirk isn't good and you added to it with I told you so type of comment.  I recall something like that?  You don't?  If you didn't post, then sorry.  But I am pretty confident you kicked in with a post because I do recall it unless I am confusing you for another?

 

I was not by the way condemning you for it and if anything complementing you.  Hey things change in time.  I actually commend you for backing off of it.  My point was you might feel the rough start louder than it actually was because I recall some loud almost giddy posts digging Kirk's grave from some long time Kirk critics when he got off to a poor-mediocre start. 

 

2 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

Kirk is a good QB. I used to believe he was above average. I no longer feel this way. Kirk has the potential to put up elite numbers and it may happen this year. I do not think Kirk is elite.

 

My argument wasn't Kirk is elite.  My argument was for me I've been higher on Kirk than he's just above average.  To me I've ranged for years from good to great.    I go back and forth.  And for me if Kirk has an elite season (if it holds and to me its a big if) then I will land on great.  I've always been between the two thoughts.  I was most down on him last season, I was higher on him for parts of 2016-2017.  So I've made both cases. 

 

Kirk is on track for something ridiculous right now in the neighborhood of 30 TD and 5 picks.   Those are Brees, Rodgers type of numbers.  For me if he succeeds in doing that and the Vikings make the playoffs and especially if they win some in the playoffs, am landing on Kirk is great.  If he on the otherhand fades at the end and the Vikings don't make the playoffs, then I'll land on good with a serious clutch gene missing.

 

I am open minded on either point?  Are you?  And I am not saying you aren't.  My question is what if Kirk finishes this season in elite fashion numbers wise and has some postseason success, any chance for you to upgrade your take on him or is it stuck on good no matter what?

 

We aren't that far apart, I agree.  I vacillate from good to great.  You are stuck on good or at least seem so for the moment.    

 

 

 

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

7 hours ago, Rex Tomb said:

OMG this thread is so pointless.  Kirk didn't want to be here anyway.  It takes two to tango and Kirk wasn't dancing.  Instead he soaked us for as much money as he could possibly get out of us before moving on.  He was completely disingenuous and everyone knew it. 

 

I also don't want a "process oriented" QB.  He has yet to beat a good defense.  The Cowboys without Vander Esch don't count.

 

How's it worked out after he left?  That's the point of the thread.  Are you really unaware that every athlete tries to soak their team for as much money as they can?  But to you for some unknown reason Kirk is unique.  He is not.