June 20, 2019, 03:09:29 AM

Author Topic: Vikings paying for Cousins deal  (Read 1914 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Gregg

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2624
  • Karma: +19/-6
Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« on: May 16, 2019, 05:27:26 PM »
Eric Kendricks just had to reword his contract to sign their first round pick.

Kyle Rudolph negotiations just fell apart.  And he says he will not take pay cut.

If he stays on the books at his current price they are 800,000 dollars under the limit.

The Kirk Cousins deal is eating at them in its second year.

And from his performance last year, he does not appear to be the kind of QB who is good enough to boost them over the top.

I questioned at acquisition when it happened and others, like ricky, agreed it would come back to haunt them.  If they could keep Rudolph that would be neat for them since they could play a 2 tight end offense with the rookie Smith.  But I don't think they can.  Imagine what is going to happen next year.

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5135
  • Karma: +38/-2
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2019, 07:22:16 PM »
Eric Kendricks just had to reword his contract to sign their first round pick.

Kyle Rudolph negotiations just fell apart.  And he says he will not take pay cut.

If he stays on the books at his current price they are 800,000 dollars under the limit.

The Kirk Cousins deal is eating at them in its second year.

And from his performance last year, he does not appear to be the kind of QB who is good enough to boost them over the top.

I questioned at acquisition when it happened and others, like ricky, agreed it would come back to haunt them.  If they could keep Rudolph that would be neat for them since they could play a 2 tight end offense with the rookie Smith.  But I don't think they can.  Imagine what is going to happen next year.


They have some hard choices to make, but one thing they could do is take Everson Griffen's base salary ($6.4M) for 2019 and convert it to a signing bonus. That would clear $5.12M for this year, but adds $1.28M to each cap year through 2022.

I wonder if Speilman is feeling any heat from the Wilf's?

Offline ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5932
  • Karma: +43/-20
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2019, 03:02:52 PM »
The Bears are also facing some cap tightness because of the Mack contract. And with Trubisky's contract running out in two years, they could have a real problem. So, two divisional rivals are having serious cap problems because of a big FA signing and moving up to draft a QB. TBH, couldn't happen to two more deserving franchises.

An article going into some detail on what the other teams in the North are facing in the near future  ;D:

https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/nfl-north-nuggets-a-little-schadenfreude-423
« Last Edit: May 17, 2019, 03:40:29 PM by ricky »
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3368
  • Karma: +59/-17
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2019, 04:35:00 PM »
This topic is a little humorous. For years many Packers fans have been crying for the Packers to over spend in the fashion that the Bears and Vikings have done the past 2 seasons, but now some of the same people are claiming how stupid both teams are for the moves they made. Spending big on the Mack's and Cousins' of the world seldom ends well, but the same will probably be said about the Packers for spending 108M on Smith and Smith in a year or two. 

Offline marklawrence

  • Administrator
  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3041
  • Karma: +45/-13
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2019, 10:03:29 PM »
This topic is a little humorous. For years many Packers fans have been crying for the Packers to over spend in the fashion that the Bears and Vikings have done the past 2 seasons, but now some of the same people are claiming how stupid both teams are for the moves they made. Spending big on the Mack's and Cousins' of the world seldom ends well, but the same will probably be said about the Packers for spending 108M on Smith and Smith in a year or two.

One must always ask, their original franchise knows them better than anyone, so what makes us smarter than them?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” -- John F. Kennedy.

Offline ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5932
  • Karma: +43/-20
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2019, 11:03:24 PM »
FA can definitely be risky. For every Reggie White or Charles Woodson, you'll find a dozen Albert Haynesworths. But teams keep trying. But recall, there were a lot of people who constantly complalined that TT never signed FA's, and depended too much on "draft and develop". So, will it work out? We'll find out.
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5135
  • Karma: +38/-2
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #6 on: May 19, 2019, 08:04:51 AM »
off topic, since this thread was supposed to be about the Vikings...……………..

Regarding the Bears and the Mack deal. Where would the Packers be right now if they had gone all out and signed Mack?

Mack's contract, along with Rodgers contract, would heave put this team in such cap hell that it would have remained there until after the Rodgers era ended (IMO).

Gute has now added 3 key pieces to the defense via free agency, and (hopefully) drafted smart with additional key defensive pieces to make the overall defense much better, rather than try and squeeze all those eggs into one player like it would have been with Mack.

It remains to be seen how it all plays out, but so far I approve of how Gute has handled it.

Offline ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5932
  • Karma: +43/-20
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #7 on: May 19, 2019, 08:51:28 AM »
off topic, since this thread was supposed to be about the Vikings...……………..

Regarding the Bears and the Mack deal. Where would the Packers be right now if they had gone all out and signed Mack?

Mack's contract, along with Rodgers contract, would heave put this team in such cap hell that it would have remained there until after the Rodgers era ended (IMO).

Gute has now added 3 key pieces to the defense via free agency, and (hopefully) drafted smart with additional key defensive pieces to make the overall defense much better, rather than try and squeeze all those eggs into one player like it would have been with Mack.

It remains to be seen how it all plays out, but so far I approve of how Gute has handled it.

For sure. And I was one of those who really wanted Mack. But in hindsight, the Packers knew what they were doing. Kind of. Because there were many reports that the Packers were trying to sign Mack. Whether they had a limit, or the pay structure wasn't as good, or he just wanted to live in a bigger city is up for debate. But at least one sports reporter saw the future more clearly than a lot of others:

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/bears/packers-reporter-thinks-green-bay-won-khalil-mack-chicago-trade
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline raptorman

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
  • Karma: +1/-2
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #8 on: May 20, 2019, 06:27:14 AM »
Eric Kendricks just had to reword his contract to sign their first round pick.

Kyle Rudolph negotiations just fell apart.  And he says he will not take pay cut.

If he stays on the books at his current price they are 800,000 dollars under the limit.

The Kirk Cousins deal is eating at them in its second year.

And from his performance last year, he does not appear to be the kind of QB who is good enough to boost them over the top.

I questioned at acquisition when it happened and others, like ricky, agreed it would come back to haunt them.  If they could keep Rudolph that would be neat for them since they could play a 2 tight end offense with the rookie Smith.  But I don't think they can.  Imagine what is going to happen next year.

Kinda hilarious if you ask me.  The difference in Cousin's contract and Rodgers is $2.5 million.  So you are telling me that the Vikings are paying for it over $2.5 million.   So, does that mean next year when Rodgers cap his is higher than Cousins the Packers will be in trouble? 
Something new coming soon!

Offline ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5932
  • Karma: +43/-20
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #9 on: May 20, 2019, 11:32:04 AM »
Kinda hilarious if you ask me.  The difference in Cousin's contract and Rodgers is $2.5 million.  So you are telling me that the Vikings are paying for it over $2.5 million.   So, does that mean next year when Rodgers cap his is higher than Cousins the Packers will be in trouble?

Well, since the Vikings chose to pay Cousins as a franchise QB, similar to Rodgers, they were hoping he'd be the guy to get them over the hump. Apparently they didn't notice that Cousins always puts up good stats, but not a lot of wins. Especially the very few times his team made the playoffs. So, do you re-sign Cousins, and hope he improves? Or dump him when his contract is done and go back to the drawing board at QB? Now, you didn't mention the Bears, but the Mack contract is only going to get bigger. And Trubisky is getting closer to the end of his rookie contract. So, the Bears are in the same boat. Extend Trubisky and really stretch their salary cap to the breaking point? Or let him go and start over again? And, yes, the salary cap is going to go up. But enough to cover the added expenses?

In all cases, the fans have to trust that the guys in charge know what they're doing. Which, of course, is not always the case. But it seems that both Chicago, Minny and even the Packers are going close to "all in" at the same time. Interesting times, indeed.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2019, 05:34:51 PM by marklawrence »
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline raptorman

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
  • Karma: +1/-2
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #10 on: May 23, 2019, 02:06:44 PM »
Let me ask  you this. Does Rodgers Contract hurt the Packers?  If not, why not?   Sure Rodgers gave them a Super Bowl, 9 years ago when their defense was #2 in the league in scoring.  But what about the last 4 years?  Rodgers is 30-24-1.  Cousins is 32-30-1.   This is a what have you done for me lately league.  Let's look at the top 5 QB's in cap hit in 2019.  1. Jimmy Garrapolo.  2. Matthew Stafford.  3. Derek Carr. 4. Joe Flacco.  5. Andrew Luck.  Tell me, did their contracts hurt their teams?   Now lets move on to 2019.  1. Matthew Stafford.  2.Kirk Cousins.  3. Andrew Luck. 4. Tom Brady. 5. Aaron Rodgers.  Again, are other QB contracts hurting their teams? Why is it that only Cousins contract is getting mentioned about putting a team in "cap hell"?   Let's move to 2020. 1. Matt Ryan.  2. Ben Roethlisberger.   3. Aaron Rodgers.  4. Matthew Stafford.  5. Russel Wilson.  Again, only Cousins contract is an issue.  Down at #6.   So, in the 3 years of Kirk's outlandish contract, he makes the top 5, top paid QB's one year.  But only his contract is hurting the team.   Why is only his contract an issue? Read more: http://purplepainforums.com/thread/1922/why-cousins-contract-hurts-team#ixzz5omfzJxIm
Something new coming soon!

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3368
  • Karma: +59/-17
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #11 on: May 23, 2019, 03:06:59 PM »
Let me ask  you this. Does Rodgers Contract hurt the Packers?  If not, why not?   Sure Rodgers gave them a Super Bowl, 9 years ago when their defense was #2 in the league in scoring.  But what about the last 4 years?  Rodgers is 30-24-1.  Cousins is 32-30-1.   This is a what have you done for me lately league.  Let's look at the top 5 QB's in cap hit in 2019.  1. Jimmy Garrapolo.  2. Matthew Stafford.  3. Derek Carr. 4. Joe Flacco.  5. Andrew Luck.  Tell me, did their contracts hurt their teams?   Now lets move on to 2019.  1. Matthew Stafford.  2.Kirk Cousins.  3. Andrew Luck. 4. Tom Brady. 5. Aaron Rodgers.  Again, are other QB contracts hurting their teams? Why is it that only Cousins contract is getting mentioned about putting a team in "cap hell"?   Let's move to 2020. 1. Matt Ryan.  2. Ben Roethlisberger.   3. Aaron Rodgers.  4. Matthew Stafford.  5. Russel Wilson.  Again, only Cousins contract is an issue.  Down at #6.   So, in the 3 years of Kirk's outlandish contract, he makes the top 5, top paid QB's one year.  But only his contract is hurting the team.   Why is only his contract an issue? Read more: http://purplepainforums.com/thread/1922/why-cousins-contract-hurts-team#ixzz5omfzJxIm


They all hurt their teams and their chances to retain their own talent and sign outside talent to build a team with depth to survive a season that will without a doubt have many injuries. That is the conundrum every team faces, pay the QB and live with unproven depth or live in the hell of not having a proven QB. The only plan that teams seem to think is a winning one right now is to load up on non-QB talent and try to win with a QB on a rookie contract. The question is, would Minnesota been farther ahead to push all-in on a rookie QB and his contract and kept all the veteran non-QB talent in place around him? Paying the QB does not seem to be a strategy that produces as well as most people seem to think it does.     

Offline Gregg

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2624
  • Karma: +19/-6
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #12 on: May 24, 2019, 01:13:20 AM »
I think we are forgetting that Cousins deal is completely guaranteed for its entire length.

I am pretty sure it was the first of its kind.

There is no getting out of it and no adjusting it.

At the time I did not think its was wise.  Because in my view, the Vikes were a defensive team.  They won and lost on D.  Cousins was going to ding that defense--he already has, in that they lost a starting DT.

But we will see. 


Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3368
  • Karma: +59/-17
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #13 on: May 24, 2019, 04:47:33 AM »
I think we are forgetting that Cousins deal is completely guaranteed for its entire length.

I am pretty sure it was the first of its kind.

There is no getting out of it and no adjusting it.

At the time I did not think its was wise.  Because in my view, the Vikes were a defensive team.  They won and lost on D.  Cousins was going to ding that defense--he already has, in that they lost a starting DT.

But we will see.

The guaranteed money is a non-factor unless he had a career ending injury early in the contract, the contract ends in 2020. The guaranteed clause is now meaningless.

Offline raptorman

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
  • Karma: +1/-2
Re: Vikings paying for Cousins deal
« Reply #14 on: May 24, 2019, 09:14:35 AM »
I think we are forgetting that Cousins deal is completely guaranteed for its entire length.

I am pretty sure it was the first of its kind.

There is no getting out of it and no adjusting it.

At the time I did not think its was wise.  Because in my view, the Vikes were a defensive team.  They won and lost on D.  Cousins was going to ding that defense--he already has, in that they lost a starting DT.

But we will see.
So Rodgers had $98 million guaranteed in his latest contract. How is that any less of stretch?   Lost a starting DT?  Who? Richardson?  He was signed to a one year deal.  They brought back Stephenson.  So exactly who did they lose?
Something new coming soon!