Championship Roster

[808vikingsfan]

I think you have been misinformed on how good Flacco's SB team was.
Rushing rank: 11th
Receiver grade rank: 3rd
Oline Pass Blocking Grade: 18th
Defensive DVOA: 19th


Vikings 2020 team:
Rushing rank: 5th
Receiver grade rank: 1st
Oline PB Grade: 18th
Defensive DVOA: 18th

Hmmm...

Let's say I was misinformed then on how good Flacco's Superbowl winning team was then. It was just as good as the one Cousins was surrounded by last year.

So what explains how that team went to and won a Superbowl?

If we agree that Flacco = Cousins, and the rest is equal as well, what then enabled the Flacco-led team to excel and win a Superbowl if it wasn't Flacco himself?

Or are you claiming that Flacco was "clutch" and that enabled it?

If Flacco was so "clutch" over his career, why didn't he have more success?

Flacco turned it on in the playoffs. He was THE reason they got to the SB. If Cousins can string together anything close to that when it matters, I'd be a fan for life.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VCDRMoA_Uc

[VikingsVictorious]

Ok the OL and defense don't matter? Tell that to Brady see what he says. He's a stick in the mud QB. Jim McMahon is a winner and took the 85 Bears to the Super Bowl. It had nothing to do with one of the most dominating defenses that ever stepped on an NFL filed. Had nothing to do with Walter sweetness Payton running through defenses. Of course Jim Mc was involved with 100 % of the snaps when he did play. It's hard handing the ball off. Shows what a D and OL can do right there. Defense is a big part of making the Super Bowl:
But there is one statistic common to every champion since 2013 – a stinginess on defense. All ranked in the Top 10 in scoring defense. They did not allow points. That’s been the one statistic universal to the success of all Super Bowl champions – 47 of the 54 winners ranked in the Top 10 in scoring defense. Of the 108 teams that have reached the Super Bowl, 89 of them ranked in the Top 10 in scoring defense.
The above shows defense matters. With our D last year no QB that ever played the game was taking that hunk of junk anywhere.

First, this is farthest from the truth. Brady is one of the best at moving inside the pocket and buying time. He's a wizard. He's also decisive and quick at getting the ball out. Two attributes that could help an average line.


I think we're missing the point here. My question was, if this stacked championship team barely makes it above .500, will the Cousins believers still want to pay $45M for a QB that cannot elevate his team? Or will they want to keep Cousins until Zimmer builds the 85 Bears D?

Why speculate about the Vikings as a whole, and Cousins in particular, having a poor season? This years team has potential to win it all, but things have to fall into place. If injuries happen or the rookie OL don't play well we won't go far. Cousins will play well like he always does. He's the least of our concerns.

[VikingsVictorious]

Let's say I was misinformed then on how good Flacco's Superbowl winning team was then. It was just as good as the one Cousins was surrounded by last year.

So what explains how that team went to and won a Superbowl?

If we agree that Flacco = Cousins, and the rest is equal as well, what then enabled the Flacco-led team to excel and win a Superbowl if it wasn't Flacco himself?

Or are you claiming that Flacco was "clutch" and that enabled it?

If Flacco was so "clutch" over his career, why didn't he have more success?

Wasn't that the Baltimore team that was considered one of the great Ds of all time and had the superstar RB. Stump is cherry picking stats. He conveniently leaves out any good stats for Cousins and bad stats for our D. He must have looked long and hard to try to find something negative about the Baltimore D. A lie is the intent to deceive. Cherry picking stats is an intent to deceive. Why even debate if you're not going to debate in good faith. You think our Receivers ranked #1 despite Cousins sucking? Or did Cousins just maybe have something to do with how productive our offense was?

EDIT: I was mixing up this team with the 2001 Baltimore team and Jamal Lewis. I remember that team. I don't really remember the 2013 Ravens much.

My apology for mixing up the 2013 Ravens with 2001. The 2001 team won with the Mighty Trent Dilfer at QB. That was the team with the great defense. Who was the better QB? Dilfer or Flacco. Flacco had one or two decent years. So did Dilfer. Both were IMO below average for NFL starters.

[fiestavike]

Right. I don't know the answer to that question, but I know what the answer to it isn't, and that's assuming the outcome of the season is already determined by the presence of one player before the season has even started.

There are multiple teams that are probably a QB away from competing for the SB. The Vikings are one of those teams.

Okay, but how could the Vikings win the SB with the Quarterback they have?

[fiestavike]

This is where we are. Let's get the discussion back on track. How can the Vikings win a super bowl this season is the only interesting question.

The numbers tell us that the key to winning it all are a top 8 scoring defense, top 8 scoring offense, top 5 QB, top 8 receivers and a good pass rush.

That is the average SB winning team.

OK. If that's the approach, then I think it's possible for Cousins to be a 'top 5 QB' statistically speaking and maybe we're in contention.

But I'm going to say those stats are pretty random and its just an avg. of teams which have won. It's an average which represents correlation not causation. Having a top 8 offense and a top 5 QB by some statistical measure is good, and is certainly indicates a good outcome, but the goal is to win games, to win plays, to win matchups, not to rise up the statistical charts. That's just correlation with how games are actually won. It doesn't cause any success at all. Its a backward form of analysis.

My worry remains the inability of the offense to produce against the leagues better defenses, and against more physical front seven units. Can our offense win those games? those plays? those matchups? The smaller, athletic OL we employ has not faired well against powerful defensive linemen. Kirk has not faired well under resulting pressure, having less time, having to throw into tighter coverages with anticipation, keeping his composure. None of that seems likely to dramatically change this season.

Defensively, my worry is that the team not be good enough to hold the line and keep the Vikings in the game against those opponents. Of those two, the shutdown defense seems more realistic than the offense raising their level against top competition. The defense has seen most of the offseason additions and our headcoach does have a track record of fielding competent defensive units. I think Zimmer will need to be willing to figure out how to let his defenders play more one gap, downhill football, where everyone knows their role and can really attack in order to have much hope of achieving the kind of defense I think it would take to win it all this year.

[VikingsVictorious]

There are multiple teams that are probably a QB away from competing for the SB. The Vikings are one of those teams.

Okay, but how could the Vikings win the SB with the Quarterback they have?

Two things the Vikings need to win with the QB we have. The rookie OLs need to play OK and Hunter needs to be back to 2019 form. Cousins is a given to play well enough for us to win it all.

[StumpHunter]

But I'm going to say those stats are pretty random and its just an avg. of teams which have won. It's an average which represents correlation not causation. Having a top 8 offense and a top 5 QB by some statistical measure is good, and is certainly indicates a good outcome, but the goal is to win games, to win plays, to win matchups, not to rise up the statistical charts. That's just correlation with how games are actually won. It doesn't cause any success at all. Its a backward form of analysis.

Looking at the most recent winners:

2015: Denver Broncos had an elite pass rush and the best secondary in the NFL. QBs who faced them were forced to hold the ball longer than they wanted because of the coverage, and then pressured or sacked because of the pass rush.

2016: Tom Brady

2017: Thanks in large part to a terrible trade, Philly had the best overall team in the NFL. They also caught two great defensive minded coaches off guard with the play of their backup.

2018: Tom Brady and great coaching

2019: Great QB and great WRs

2020: Great QB, great WRs, great pass rush

Philly is the one we could emulate. The pass rush will not be good enough to match that 2015 Broncos team and we don't have Tom Brady or Mahomes on this team. If Davis and Darrisaw are two of the greatest rookie Olinemen of all time, Bradbury and Cleveland make huge leaps, Peterson returns to his HOF form, Hunter comes back 100%, Wonnum takes a huge leap, and we have a lot of injury luck, we could match Philly.

[VikingLord]

I have already gone over this. It took the single greatest 4 game playoff performance of any QB in the past 15 years for them to win it all.

If Flacco can do it, or Foles can do it, why can't Cousins do it?

Flacco and Cousins aren't equals. They are different QBs with different strengths and weaknesses. Cousins strengths are playing consistently better against bad defenses than any other QB in the NFL. Flacco's strengths were playing really well in a single playoff and being the biggest part of his team winning the SB.

Obviously they are different QBs.

But Flacco wasn't a great QB. Neither was Foles. Both got hot at the right time.

He stopped putting in the effort requisite of a great QB, had injury problems, the league figured him out or possibly a combination of all 3. All I know is that for 4 Sundays Flacco caught lightning in a bottle.

Stump, Cousins can do that too.

Sure, there is no guarantee he will do it. There are plenty of reasons to believe he won't.

But if Foles and Flacco prove anything, it is that under the right circumstances anything is possible. All things considered, I'd rather take that as the moral of this story and head into this season with some optimism given the strength of the overall team than head into it consigned to believe that no matter how good the overall team is, they have no chance at winning a Superbowl with Cousins.

[VikingLord]

Okay, but how could the Vikings win the SB with the Quarterback they have?

Two things the Vikings need to win with the QB we have. The rookie OLs need to play OK and Hunter needs to be back to 2019 form. Cousins is a given to play well enough for us to win it all.

And the Vikings need the breaks to go their way.

Teams that win it all also seem to get the breaks. They escape serious injury issues. The calls go their way more often than not. They find ways to eek out wins in close games that could go either way.

I've watched many Vikings teams over the years that were just flat-out better than their opponents and they still lost, and often it was because one or more breaks went against them. Especially in the big games, the Vikings have been almost historically on the wrong side of the break. Starting with that freakin' non-call offensive PI by Drew Pearson and continuing to the present, the Vikings have just seemingly found ways to lose.

No better time to change that seeming trend than this season.

[VikingLord]

The numbers tell us that the key to winning it all are a top 8 scoring defense, top 8 scoring offense, top 5 QB, top 8 receivers and a good pass rush.

That is the average SB winning team.

OK. If that's the approach, then I think it's possible for Cousins to be a 'top 5 QB' statistically speaking and maybe we're in contention.

But I'm going to say those stats are pretty random and its just an avg. of teams which have won. It's an average which represents correlation not causation. Having a top 8 offense and a top 5 QB by some statistical measure is good, and is certainly indicates a good outcome, but the goal is to win games, to win plays, to win matchups, not to rise up the statistical charts. That's just correlation with how games are actually won. It doesn't cause any success at all. Its a backward form of analysis.

My worry remains the inability of the offense to produce against the leagues better defenses, and against more physical front seven units. Can our offense win those games? those plays? those matchups? The smaller, athletic OL we employ has not faired well against powerful defensive linemen. Kirk has not faired well under resulting pressure, having less time, having to throw into tighter coverages with anticipation, keeping his composure. None of that seems likely to dramatically change this season.

Defensively, my worry is that the team not be good enough to hold the line and keep the Vikings in the game against those opponents. Of those two, the shutdown defense seems more realistic than the offense raising their level against top competition. The defense has seen most of the offseason additions and our headcoach does have a track record of fielding competent defensive units. I think Zimmer will need to be willing to figure out how to let his defenders play more one gap, downhill football, where everyone knows their role and can really attack in order to have much hope of achieving the kind of defense I think it would take to win it all this year.

I think the focus on Cousins is a red herring despite the stats.

If the Vikings are going to get to and win a Superbowl, they'll do it because they can run the ball consistently on downs 1 and 2, and they can defend the run consistently on downs 1 and 2.

If they do that, they create favorable options on down 3 that don't put too much of the burden on the QB and passing game to keep drives going, while on defense they create favorable defensive situations on down 3 that vastly increase the chances they'll get off the field and get the ball back in the hands of their offense.

If they can do that, Cousins doesn't have to be a hero. That doesn't mean he doesn't have to perform, but he doesn't have to be a hero and pull rabbits out of his hat for the team to win.

So the question for me is, does this Vikings team have the pieces in place to be top 10 rushing on downs 1 and 2 and top 10 run defense on those same downs?

I think they do. We'll have to see it on the field, but it should be pretty evident pretty quickly if they do in fact have the pieces necessary to accomplish those two things.

And if they do, Cousins is going to look a lot better even to those who think he's not all that good.

[VikingsVictorious]

I have already gone over this. It took the single greatest 4 game playoff performance of any QB in the past 15 years for them to win it all.

If Flacco can do it, or Foles can do it, why can't Cousins do it?

Flacco and Cousins aren't equals. They are different QBs with different strengths and weaknesses. Cousins strengths are playing consistently better against bad defenses than any other QB in the NFL. Flacco's strengths were playing really well in a single playoff and being the biggest part of his team winning the SB.

Obviously they are different QBs.

But Flacco wasn't a great QB. Neither was Foles. Both got hot at the right time.

He stopped putting in the effort requisite of a great QB, had injury problems, the league figured him out or possibly a combination of all 3. All I know is that for 4 Sundays Flacco caught lightning in a bottle.

Stump, Cousins can do that too.

Sure, there is no guarantee he will do it. There are plenty of reasons to believe he won't.

But if Foles and Flacco prove anything, it is that under the right circumstances anything is possible. All things considered, I'd rather take that as the moral of this story and head into this season with some optimism given the strength of the overall team than head into it consigned to believe that no matter how good the overall team is, they have no chance at winning a Superbowl with Cousins.

He has decided for no reason whatsoever that the Vikings can't win it all with Cousins. Don't confuse him with the facts.

[VikingsVictorious]

Two things the Vikings need to win with the QB we have. The rookie OLs need to play OK and Hunter needs to be back to 2019 form. Cousins is a given to play well enough for us to win it all.

And the Vikings need the breaks to go their way.

Teams that win it all also seem to get the breaks. They escape serious injury issues. The calls go their way more often than not. They find ways to eek out wins in close games that could go either way.

I've watched many Vikings teams over the years that were just flat-out better than their opponents and they still lost, and often it was because one or more breaks went against them. Especially in the big games, the Vikings have been almost historically on the wrong side of the break. Starting with that freakin' non-call offensive PI by Drew Pearson and continuing to the present, the Vikings have just seemingly found ways to lose.

No better time to change that seeming trend than this season.

To win it all without the breaks going your way you better have a super dominant team. It's been a long time since one of those were around. 1985 Bears perhaps?

[CharVike]

Ok the OL and defense don't matter? Tell that to Brady see what he says. He's a stick in the mud QB. Jim McMahon is a winner and took the 85 Bears to the Super Bowl. It had nothing to do with one of the most dominating defenses that ever stepped on an NFL filed. Had nothing to do with Walter sweetness Payton running through defenses. Of course Jim Mc was involved with 100 % of the snaps when he did play. It's hard handing the ball off. Shows what a D and OL can do right there. Defense is a big part of making the Super Bowl:
But there is one statistic common to every champion since 2013 – a stinginess on defense. All ranked in the Top 10 in scoring defense. They did not allow points. That’s been the one statistic universal to the success of all Super Bowl champions – 47 of the 54 winners ranked in the Top 10 in scoring defense. Of the 108 teams that have reached the Super Bowl, 89 of them ranked in the Top 10 in scoring defense.
The above shows defense matters. With our D last year no QB that ever played the game was taking that hunk of junk anywhere.

First, this is farthest from the truth. Brady is one of the best at moving inside the pocket and buying time. He's a wizard. He's also decisive and quick at getting the ball out. Two attributes that could help an average line.


I think we're missing the point here. My question was, if this stacked championship team barely makes it above .500, will the Cousins believers still want to pay $45M for a QB that cannot elevate his team? Or will they want to keep Cousins until Zimmer builds the 85 Bears D?

PFF has the Bucs OL ranked No 5 in the NFL our rank is No 26. Bucs OL is great and ours is basically garbage. You call ours average. Either you are furthest from the truth or PFF has no idea how to grade an OL so what they say is useless. We all know what Brady can do the proof is there for all to see. I've seen Brady under big time pressure and he struggles like every QB I have ever seen play the game since 1970.

Super Bowl XLII: Giants 17, Patriots 14 (2007)
Bad time for a stinker. The Patriots’ bid for an undefeated season went by the wayside as the Giants sacked Brady five times and forced a lost fumble. The NFL’s then-all-time highest scoring offense went six straight drives without scoring.

Brady didn't do to much moving because he was under big time pressure. Brady was sacked 5 times. Not too much pocket awareness. Couldn't get the ball out quick enough. Wasn't decisive at all. Bottom line big time pressure and some sacks made him perform less that his stellar self. It happens to all of them. Same thing happen to Cousins out in SF for the playoff loss. 6 Fing sacks. No QB performs when they are getting pounded. Cook had 2 yards a carry. He's are best all around back ever IMO and he didn't do anything. Zero blocking didn't help him at all.

I never called this roster championship. We don't have an OL. Nothing. How is that a championship roster? I don't see it. Maybe you do and that's OK we all have an opinion including PFF. They have us ranked as a garbage OL. If the Bucs had our OL they wouldn't have a chance. Brady would never function at his top flight level with our OL. He would get to much pressure. He like all QBs don't perform very well when under pressure.

I would like to see us trade Cousins. Do a Stafford deal. Put our next super star QB in and let him develop with this rag tag OL they put together. That will be fine by me. Then in 3 years QB will be at the top of needs. I've seen this act before. It never ends.

[CharVike]

Ok the OL and defense don't matter? Tell that to Brady see what he says. He's a stick in the mud QB. Jim McMahon is a winner and took the 85 Bears to the Super Bowl. It had nothing to do with one of the most dominating defenses that ever stepped on an NFL filed. Had nothing to do with Walter sweetness Payton running through defenses. Of course Jim Mc was involved with 100 % of the snaps when he did play. It's hard handing the ball off. Shows what a D and OL can do right there. Defense is a big part of making the Super Bowl:
But there is one statistic common to every champion since 2013 – a stinginess on defense. All ranked in the Top 10 in scoring defense. They did not allow points. That’s been the one statistic universal to the success of all Super Bowl champions – 47 of the 54 winners ranked in the Top 10 in scoring defense. Of the 108 teams that have reached the Super Bowl, 89 of them ranked in the Top 10 in scoring defense.
The above shows defense matters. With our D last year no QB that ever played the game was taking that hunk of junk anywhere.

First, this is farthest from the truth. Brady is one of the best at moving inside the pocket and buying time. He's a wizard. He's also decisive and quick at getting the ball out. Two attributes that could help an average line.


I think we're missing the point here. My question was, if this stacked championship team barely makes it above .500, will the Cousins believers still want to pay $45M for a QB that cannot elevate his team? Or will they want to keep Cousins until Zimmer builds the 85 Bears D?

PFF has the Bucs OL ranked No 5 in the NFL our rank is No 26. Bucs OL is great and ours is basically garbage. You call ours average. Either you are furthest from the truth or PFF has no idea how to grade an OL so what they say is useless. We all know what Brady can do the proof is there for all to see. I've seen Brady under big time pressure and he struggles like every QB I have ever seen play the game since 1970.

Super Bowl XLII: Giants 17, Patriots 14 (2007)
Bad time for a stinker. The Patriots’ bid for an undefeated season went by the wayside as the Giants sacked Brady five times and forced a lost fumble. The NFL’s then-all-time highest scoring offense went six straight drives without scoring.

Brady didn't do to much moving because he was under big time pressure. Brady was sacked 5 times. Not too much pocket awareness. Couldn't get the ball out quick enough. Wasn't decisive at all. Bottom line big time pressure and some sacks made him perform less that his stellar self. It happens to all of them. Same thing happen to Cousins out in SF for the playoff loss. 6 Fing sacks. No QB performs when they are getting pounded. Cook had 2 yards a carry. He's are best all around back ever IMO and he didn't do anything. Zero blocking didn't help him at all.

I never called this roster championship. We don't have an OL. Nothing. How is that a championship roster? I don't see it. Maybe you do and that's OK we all have an opinion including PFF. They have us ranked as a garbage OL. If the Bucs had our OL they wouldn't have a chance. Brady would never function at his top flight level with our OL. He would get to much pressure. He like all QBs don't perform very well when under pressure.

I would like to see us trade Cousins. Do a Stafford deal. Put our next super star QB in and let him develop with this rag tag OL they put together. That will be fine by me. Then in 3 years QB will be at the top of needs. I've seen this act before. It never ends.

[CharVike]

You can't look at Cousins in a vacuum when it's a team sport but I think it's also equally erroneous to assume his contribution to success and failure is anywhere near equal any other player. I mean, look at the guys contract. He's effectively had 6 years of fully guaranteed money and will make $45M next year.

He's paid like an elite QB and almost no one uses that word to describe him. That's not "good enough" or "best we've had" money. That's money you pay to a top 5 QB. Certainly top 10 and it's very arguable if Cousins is a top 10 QB. In the eyes of many third party evaluators like PFF, he's not. And if he is, he's barely squeaking in.

Stafford is an above average QB who bled the Lions for years. That's not what you want to emulate. Brady on the other hand, took a pay cut to get better weapons around him. I'm glad we grabbed Mond and we should grab someone next year too. Even if the odds are around 20% that they pan out, that's a lot higher than a Heinicke, Sloter, Stanley, Browning, etc.

Cousins is here whether we like it or not but I'm glad Rick is finally contemplating life after Cousins. Maybe Cousins signs a team friendly deal next year. He's made his money. But if he doesn't, we finally have some sort of contingency.

I use QB rating and Cousins had a 105.0. Wilson who is considered one of the all time greats had a 105.1. Of course Rodgers was No 1 at 121.5. Mahomes had a 108.2. Watson 112.4 and could only get 4 wins. That's an all time loser. Great stats though. Cousins was No 8. .1 ponts behind Wilson. I like Cousins. And a QB that plays like him won't be cheap unless they are on rookie deals. Cousins gets ripped by the media. He did something that pissed them off when he was in Washington. Maybe beating out RG ME pissed some media people off. Even Viking fans rip him. Now Mond is the greatest ever. The guy don't throw an accurate ball. That won't work in the NFL.