Source
r/minnesotavikings•
Line--O

If win/loss is such an important thing with Kirk, why are people drooling over Watson and Stafford?

Stafford's win percentage is worse than Kirk's and Watson is barely above .500. Stafford has never won a playoff game and Watson has the same playoff record as Kirk. Watson put up great stats this year but his team went 4-12. Kirk put up great stats and his team went 7-9.

Why does wins/losses not matter with them but they do with Kirk? Don't even say they had bad teams because you don't give Kirk that leeway.

You say he can't play under pressure? How the hell does he put up those numbers while being one of the most pressured QBs in the league then? He won't win a Super Bowl? Dan Marino must suck too then. The criticism of Kirk is so hypocritical.

The only fair criticism of Kirk is his backloaded contract. Even then, it is not because he is overpaid. His cap hit is lower than Stafford. If you go year by year, his contract is middling until the final year. That forces the team to restructure to get it back down. That means they have to keep him or pay out the ass at the end.

Edit: To be clear, I think Watson and Stafford are great QBs.

Posted Jan 8, 2021, 1:07 AM UTC · edited

5674
PhilosophicallyNaiveoregon•

It's because we only judge OUR quarterback by that awful standard. Other Qbs we recognize that Qb ability and wins are separate, that the former contributes to the latter but doesn't control it, so you can never truly derive from the former from the latter. Watson was incredible this season, a truly unarguable top-tier Qb, and he went 4-12 rofl.

51
40for6088•

Highlights versus watching entire games for entire seasons. The same guys who are the grass is greener don't realize their wives and girlfriends feel the same way.

5
ZenVacuum1•

First off, no one is putting Stafford and Watson in the same category and second Watson had a bottom 5 running game and a bottom 5 defense.

If you put Kirk on the Texans this year they're not winning more than 4 games. If you put Watson on the Vikings we're a playoff team.

-22
PhilosophicallyNaiveoregon•

I'm mocking the idea that we should judge Qbs by wins/losses or wins/losses against winning teams, not saying Cousins is better than Watson. Watson has been better than Cousins this year clearly, and Watson winning the 1 extra game to get the Vikings to the playoffs is something I would expect from him. One extra game.

It's moronic that we have the same people calling for multiple 1sts and 2nds to be given up for Watson saying Kirk's bad and you can prove that by showing he's a .500 Qb or doesn't have playoff wins. What's Watson's record? Barely above .500. Playoff record? 1-2. Weird, kinda similar to Kirk huh? But he's an elite/borderline elite Qb, everybody agrees with this, and yet everybody cites the same stats Watson fails at to paint Cousins as worse than he is.

9
Line--OOP•

Kirk haters:

It's about winning games. It's not the PFF Championships.

Also Kirk haters:

Watson is 4-12 but he is the the third highest PFF rated QB.

19
PhilosophicallyNaiveoregon•

Exactly rofl. Every time.

11
ZenVacuum1•

Weird, kinda similar to Kirk huh? But he's an elite/borderline elite Qb, everybody agrees with this, and yet everybody cites the same stats Watson fails at to paint Cousins as worse than he is.

If this is the best you can do it's time to just take a break and realize you're on the wrong side of the argument. Kirk has been a starter for 6 years and is .500 with one 10 win season (the rest fall between 7-9 and 9-7) and one playoff win. Deshaun has been a starter half as long, has a 10 win and 11 win season and a playoff win. Deshaun was also quarterbacking a squad far worse than anything Kirk has ever led this season.

If you can't grasp a sample size in Kirk that is twice as big as Watson's I don't know what to tell you.

-14
PhilosophicallyNaiveoregon•

None of this in any way addresses the issue. I'm not saying Cousins is equal to Watson, so the majority of what you brought up doesn't seem to apply to anything. Watson is better than Cousins, can we both agree we agree on that? We're talking about how to make sound arguments, and the arguments being made are fundamentally unsound against Cousins when citing win/loss record and the like.

Regardless, Kirk was on Redskins teams that were worse than either playoff Texans teams (with the exclusion of 2016). Redskins 2015 were inferior to both Texans 2018 and 2019 disregarding Qbs. Redskins 2017 were so cripplingly injured it's a miracle they won what they did, they were comparable talent-wise to the 2020 Texans.

Here's a magical thing you can do: Kirk Cousins with the Vikings over 3 seasons, 25-21-1, 1-1 in the Playoffs. Oh, would you look at that, similar sample size! Better playoff win/loss record and regular season record. Magical. 2020 Vikings had a better supporting cast than 2020 Texans and... would you look at that, better win/loss record too, in fact we beat them head to head.

Point is that wins/losses aren't a good measuring stick for Qbs. Watson is a better Qb with a worse win/loss rate (in the playoffs too) over his 4 seasons with the Texans than Cousins 3 with the Vikings.

7
Nate1492•

Looks like you're on the wrong side of this argument.

3
BobFubar242•

This is a quandary to me

Vikings fans: let’s get rid of Kirk bc he costs us too much money.

Also Vikings fans: let’s trade for a QB who has a higher cap hit average than our current QB. And forgo our future drafts.

15
Line--OOP•

I've seen people saying that Watson is worth 3 first rounders, a 2nd and Kirk. He'll likely get a more expensive contract too. It's ridiculous.

He's supposed to be a mobile QB with better pocket presence but even that didn't help him pull off wins with a horrible o-line.

He's younger. I'll give him that.

8
humpyrton•

Watson also invites pressure trying to play hero ball

0
moldy_78•

Cousins is a top 10 QB, Watson is the 2nd most valuable player in the NFL.

Any rational person should want to keep Kirk over some rookie but at the same time any rational person would want to obtain Watson.

It's probably not happening but those two things can both be true. And the bad faith arguments against Kirk are equally bad when applied to Deshaun.

14
Nate1492•

So Mahommes and Aaron aren't in this discussion?

3
moldy_78•

Who do you think is #1 lol. No a 37 year old is not in the discussion.

-2
Nate1492•

Calling watson the 2nd most Valuable player in the NFL just doesn't seem right to me. He's looking like early Matthew Stafford.

2
moldy_78•

Idk what to tell you homie

-1
MrBlooregardQKazoo•

What is the point of having a QB if they will have higher hit on your cap as well as trading away future? It won't get you more wins.

1
moldy_78•

Deshauns contract is extremely low once you trade for him because Houston already paid the bonuses.

Having a 25 year old #2 most valuable player in the NFL is better for the future than Wyatt Davis and a late 1st.

3
cjpren11•

Yeah unless I’m wrong and my experience in madden trades is misleading we would only be on the hook for the non guaranteed portion of watsons contract which would be like 10 million next year and then 32 the next 3 years, a bargain for a top 3 or 4 qb asset. I mean I would be beyond blown away if we did the deal but watsons cap hit wouldn’t be the reason we didn’t do it.

3
moldy_78•

That is correct. Kirk wouldn't be a bad deal for them either.

1
blimblo•

Where is this #2 most valuable player coming from??

1
moldy_78•

It's just an objective truth that everyone agrees about, glad you asked

-2
MrBlooregardQKazoo•

His contract hasn't started yet though? And does bonus matter since it gets stretched to years of contract?

1
moldy_78•

The Texans already paid all of that. The Vikings only pay his salary and roster bonuses. Pro rated bonuses are accelerated onto Houston's cap.

1
viking1340•

Get Kirk an O line and see how he performs. No QB can do much if he's running for his life. We don't need a new target at QB thats going to be the next big flop because he cant take his eye off of the pass rush.

11
[deleted]•

A ) Stafford has a better contract

B ) Watson is a lot younger

There you go

8
howsaboutyougriddy•

A ) Stafford is worse

B ) Watson is better

C ) Wins are not a single player statistic

9
MrBlooregardQKazoo•

Contract structure isn't on QB.

1
lilicebergSalt and Culpepper•

Because Kirk Cousins went 0-9 on MNF and no one will ever let that go

7
Sir_Vikingz•

Some of those loses weren't his fault though. The one against the Chiefs especially.

4
Mry64_Skol to the Bowl•

It’s because people will cherry pick stats that already fit their preconceived opinions. People didn’t like that he got that big contract before the 2018 season because the Redskins were never a great team and just middle of the road at best. By default, that’s how they viewed Kirk too.

So, with that in mind, they hold Kirk to such an unrealistic standard based on his contract and fail to evaluate him on an individual level. If the Vikings lose, they blame Kirk. If the Vikings win, the reason is that yeah Kirk was decent but Dalvin, Thielen, Zimmer’s defense etc. did the majority of the work. Or they just refuse to talk about Kirk entirely because they don’t want to go against their preconceived negative opinions about him.

I’ll never forget the time that Stephen A. Smith said the Vikings should CUT Kirk Cousins after their week 4 loss @ Chicago last season. Yeah let’s just go with Sean Mannion for 3 months when we have a ton of expiring contracts at the end of the year and an aging team. It didn’t make sense whatsoever and certainly now looks even more dumb.

The truth is that the Kirk slander is usually not valid. Yeah he has some bad moments but so do a lot of other QBs. Generally, Kirk is an above average QB that can play at a borderline top 5 level when he’s hot. We just need to build around him to cover up his weaknesses and maximize his strengths. If Kirk plays like he did for the majority of this season, we can win a super bowl with him.

5
s6original•

People are drooling over Matt Stafford? We got Favre for a bit and it worked well until it didn't but Stafford isn't Bret Favre and who wants a quarterback from their own division if it isn't Bret Favre?

Anyway, I personally don't think any other quarterback could have done much better than Kirk has since he's been here. With a Brady Patriots caliber offensive line we could only imagine how much better his (and our) statistics and success would be.

4
alex_o_O_Hung•

I’m actually not Vikings fan but I really like to watch your team play so I might be less biased. When Kirk came to the Vikings people thought the Vikings were one good qb away from Super Bowl but that season Kirk were performing very well so it kind of set the tone. Besides, Stafford and Watson have been really consistent through ever since they came into the league and Kirk only had one (or two, I can’t remember) good season before coming to the Vikings, so it’s more reasonable to doubt him than to doubt those two. If those two switch teams this off season and then have a bad season, people are going to say stuff about them as well.

3
FridgesArePeopleToo•

Kirk has consistently better than Stafford year in and year out

1
jhaze1999•

Because Kirk becomes a hero in a half shell when pressure gets home, he turtles up and that's it, and I love Kirk but it is what it is.

Watson shines when pressure arrives, the line breaks down and he can improvise.

As Vikings fans we know in our heart of hearts that we won't actually fix the Oline any time soon, so as unlikely as getting Watson is, the idea that we can have someone make magic happen when the line inevitably breaks down is the dream.

3
Darth_Brooks_IIWhy isn't Jim Marshall in the Hall of Fame?•

The Grass here ------

The Grass there ----- Greener

2
javierzamb1•

Viking fans during the season: OMG our O line and D line sucks, Zimmer fix these ffs! What's the point on paying too much for a QB if you don't protect him, besides that's too much cap money.

Viking fans one day after the season is over: let's go for Watson, use top draft picks and more cap money to get him!

2
SlowCrates•

I agree with you.

The only major plus on the argument for Watson is that he's still young and learning -- his ceiling might be significantly higher -- we don't know.

But trading Kirk for Watson would be stupid short term because Kirk has chemistry with the team and knows the system. Long term, Watson probably gets the fuck out of town, anyway. And it's not like he's significantly cheaper than Kirk.

Let's stick with Kirk! He's more than good enough to win with. Just have to get all our ducks in a row before making a run.

1
Welu522•

He’s more expensive than Kirk.

-1
PositivityIsTrendingvikings•

I think you’re maybe overstating how important people think his win/loss record is. Cousins isn’t on their same level because he goes on extreme cold stretches (10 ints in first five games) as often as he goes on hot stretches. Stafford and Watson are much more consistent, and therefore better.

That’s why people are drooling over them - because they’re both better QBs than Cousins, regardless of win/loss records.

1
Line--OOP•

6 of those 10 INTs came in two games. It's not fair to say he played bad in all of those games when he had a 2/1 TD/INT ratio and came within one point of beating Seattle and Tennessee in the other ones. It's just blowing things out of proportion.

2
Webjunky3california•

And at least 2 of those INT's are from hail mary plays.

1
howsaboutyougriddy•

1 was a hail mary and another was on a chuck and pray on 4th and long, which was essentially a hail mary. Those shouldn’t be attributed to “bad play”.

Stafford is absolutely not a better QB than Cousins, especially not this season. Watson is.

1
FridgesArePeopleToo•

Stafford is consistently worse

1
Nate1492•

Got any other examples of these 'extreme cold streaks' or is that 2 game, 6 int, stretch all ya got?

1
PositivityIsTrendingvikings•

I mean, it seems like he has at least one just boneheaded stupid play per week. Sometimes he gets punished for it (first play of falcons game) and sometimes he doesn’t (under pressure vs Bears, dumps it off right into the DE’s hand who drops it). So regardless of if it’s multi-game stretches or not, my main point about him not being as consistent as Stafford/Watson still stands.

He isn’t as good as Stafford was, or as good as Watson is, which is why they get more love than Cousins.

1
Nate1492•

Ahh, so the answer is 'no, Nate1492, I don't have another example because I'm full of shit, but let me change the subject'.

Cool.

Positivity. Is. Not. Trending.

1
PositivityIsTrendingvikings•

Sure, it's somewhat pedantic, but you were right that I would have been better off saying that Cousins is inconsistent on a play-to-play basis rather than a game-to-game basis which I implied. I hardly think my attempt to clarify that is changing the subject, though.

And the broader subject of the whole post is whether Cousins is as good as Stafford or Watson; which we were staying on until you started attacking me.

1
CultureVulture629•

Easy. None of them played in the NFC East, saving them from exposure to the most wretched, scummy, and villainous fanbases in the league.

1
Original_Pumpf•

To be fair, I think that Stafford's rep HAS suffered some due to him being on the Lions (aka "not winning very many games". He's respected, but I don't think anyone puts him in the top tier of QBs (even though his stats might say that he is).

1
you_got_it_joban•

This is Watson's first bad year, he was 11-5, 10-5 the first 2 years as a starter. Losing his best reciever and having an inept coach got them off to a bad start. Kirk's always hung around 0.500 throughout his career.

Watson was PFF's 3 highest rated QB this year, seems worth the top money to me

-1†
msteel4u•

I think Cousins is an average no frills QB. Will never win a game cause he hoists the team on his shoulders. He manages a game and his job is to not mess it up. It would be fun to have some exciting. Inspiring to teammates kind of QB.

-3†
Mikeblows69•

The Vikings led the league in explosive plays this year(20+ Yd passes). Kirk benefits from two great wrs but they benefit from him too. Jeff doesn’t set a record with a game manager throwing to him. Kindve silly this is still an argument

5†
msteel4u•

Your right, he’s a dynamo. Good thing Washington didn’t need him. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with being an average NFL caliber QB. Seriously? Is he Rodgers in your estimate? Why are we not in the playoffs playing with home field advantage if Cousins was better than average? Stop drinking the purple koolaid and be reasonable.

PS Joe Flacco was a game manager too. He has a Super Bowl ring. Oh and Case Keenum, with similar supporting cast, got us to the playoffs.

0†
Mikeblows69•

I think the number one reason we aren’t in the playoffs is because of all the injuries on defence honestly. Certainly I think the offence was a strength this year. By all countable metrics cousins is a top 10 qb this year and probably over the past few years,although he’s closer to the bottom of the top 10 than the top. I believe there can be an in between ground of rodgers(dynamo) and teddy bridgewater(game manager). If you can’t see that then I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

0†
msteel4u•

I will concede that Teddy is more Game manager than Cousins who is definitely better. Also, if Cousins had more time, he might be even better. But when I looked at how Diggs stepped it up this year with Allen as QB, it did give me pause. Top QBs: Rodgers, Mahomes, Lamar Jackson, Allen, Murray, Watson, Wilson, Prescott...the debate starts here, Brady, Hebert, Burrow, Tannehill, Ryan, Stafford, Roethlisberger and of course Cousins...with Mayfield and Hurts rounding out what I would consider the median or average group.

I guess my whole wish would be to finally have a Rodgers, Mahomes type QB to watch in purple. Didn’t Brett Favre bring added excitement even in the decline of his career.

But I will say this, Cousins does have that Minnesota nice, clean cut personality that represents Minnesota nicely.

3
Sir_Vikingz•

Ironic in that Kirk being a better game manager then Keenum is the reason we signed him. Remember he took less money to sign with us instead of the Jets who were offering $90 mil.

1
Financial_Eagle•

Talent wise Stafford is better than Kirk and Watson. Kirk and Watson are comparable results wise. Watson is better than all because of AGE. We wouldnt have to worry about QB for 10-12 years.

-3
Nate1492•

5 years ago, sure.

1
SurlyWet•

Stafford and Watson are not winner's. Kirk hasn't proved he is either. But I would keep Kirk over those two. Yep.

-7
govecolo•

That’s not really fair to say about Stafford and Watson because they have been on he Lions and Texans for their whole careers

1
Welu522•

I mean Kirk was on Washington...

5
govecolo•

Kirk is irrelevant to my point. I was saying it is unfair to say that Stafford and Watson are not winners since they have been on two franchises that just lose and/or don't surround them with them necessary help.

-2