Vikings Message Board.Com

Posted: **Fri Feb 12, 2021 2:29 am**

chicagopurple wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 1:47 pm no top tier QB is going to consider MN....we have no OL. We have an out dated Coach who refuses input from others. Nothing good will happen till Wilf cleans house......good luck with that.

Kirk always has the highest Time to Throw measurement for non scrambling QB's. He's always near the 2.8-3.0 mark Any mobile QB that comes here will have enough time. Tired of hearing that as an excuse. Kirk is indecisive and holds on to the ball too long. It's been an issue for 8 years.

Posted: **Fri Feb 12, 2021 7:46 am**

808vikingsfan wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 2:11 am
YikesVikes wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 1:02 pm There are rumors of Wilson being disgruntled and unhappy with the Seahawks. If he demands a trade, would you guys move Kirk for him. For me the answer is yes and twice on Sunday.
I'd move Kirk just to move Kirk but to see RW in purple...

What's the salary situation ?

He would cost any team that traded for him about 19 million a year until 2023.

Posted: **Fri Feb 12, 2021 8:39 am**

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 9:40 pm
Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 4:21 pm Was it just me or did I see someone really say “Wilson isn’t being protected because he’s taking up too much cap space and they can’t afford OL” and then it was deleted?.....

Yeah....that should’ve been deleted
It is in a different thread and not deleted because it was a great point. It is not so cut and dry like your quote that isn't a quote, and there is more to it than just the cap, but Wilson is the 3rd highest paid QB in the NFL and the biggest reason his team can't afford to pay for better Olinemen. He is not an "overrated passer" like some have called him, so he is worth the money, but even with a top 3 QB that kind of cap hit hurts teams.

These QBs, Rodgers, Wilson and Watson complain about the teams around them while eating up 15% of the cap. Not that I blame them for wanting make as much as they can, but if they truly wanted a better team, they would take a pay cut so their team could spend the money on a better line or adding weapons.

I am not alone in my opinion of Wilson's cap hit making it more difficult for Seattle to build an Oline, it is a pretty common opinion among Seahawk fans.

Dude that's not the way it works. This is the quarterback market. They are the highest paid players in the NFL. Guys like Brady and Brees taking pay cuts are rare occasions and can even sometimes warrant that given their age. But you cant expect a guy in his prime to take a paycut to make the team around him better at that position.

No less the biggest takeaway here....GMs CHOOSE where to spend their money and CHOOSE what position to take in each round of the draft. It's not like Seattle has some great defense that they are dumping all of this money into. They were one of the worst in the NFL. If anything, it's on the GM that they havent done a good job protecting him. You cant fault Russell Wilson for that. I've said for years now that Wilson has a terrible OL. And I know for a fact many on here were arguing with me last year and prior saying that wasnt the case. You might have been one of them. Who knows with the amount of pis#ing matches we've had and I dont really have the time to look back.

But regardless, Seattle chose not to invest in their OL. No different than Spielman choosing not to invest at guard. That's on them, not the QB. I'm not sure what you expect these QBs to accept for contracts but I can tell you that you're way off whatever it is. It's like you got caught up in Keenum doing well in 2017 making $2 million and think QBs shouldnt get paid like they do. Idk. And on top of all that, offensive lines arent even built through free agency. They are built through the draft first and then filled by free agency. Which also proves even further that money has nothing to do with it. Draft picks dont cost teams endless cap space. If you arent drafting offensive lineman and attempting to protect your QB then that's your problem.

The last 4 draft classes, they went with the following:
2017- 2nd round C, 6th round OT
2018- 5th round OT
2019- 4th round OG
2020- 3rd round OG

....what does that have anything to do with Russell Wilsons contract? Absolutely nothing. That's just simply neglect on the GMs part.

Many say Spielman has neglected the OL at times and his last 4 years look like this:
2017- 3rd round C, 5th round OG
2018- 2nd round OT, 6th round OG
2019- 1st round C, 4th round OG, 6th round OT
2020- 2nd round OT, 6th round OT, 7th round OG

We've drafted double the offensive lineman Seattle has in the last 4 years and guys believes Spielman neglects the OL....

Spielmans problem is look above at the early round picks....2 centers and 2 tackles. The problem is, he's not investing early enough at the guard position because following the early rounds, he's drafted 4 guards. It's like he's still fishing for the Joe Berger, Brandon Fusco, John Sullivan, Matt Birk's of the world in the later rounds. He needs to just simply invest in an early round guard. Which granted, there havent been many first round guards lately but at least a 2nd-3rd rounder. And sadly I dont think it will happen this year given Zimmer will be hell bent on fixing the defense.

Either way, if your offensive line unit has been bad for years and you continue to ignore it like Seattle has, that's on the GM and Pete Carroll. Not Russell Wilson. No different than the Vikings. Kirk Cousins contract isnt preventing Spielman and Zim from fixing the OL (mainly guard). That is there choice and they've chosen not to invest in either guard spot.

Posted: **Fri Feb 12, 2021 11:21 am**

Wilson went to two Super Bowls. That D was one of the best if not the best in NFL history. He cost the team in the playoffs this year. Pick 6 and there wasn't any pressure at all. Bad read bad throw. His turnover ratio was very high this year.

But for a brief stretch from Week 7 to Week 10, quarterback Russell Wilson had 10 turnovers and the Seahawks lost three of four. That prompted a change from the pass-heavy approach to a more balanced look.

While Seattle started to run more, the passing game started to really slow down as teams started to play with two-high safeties and took away deep passes. That led to far fewer explosive plays and even though those deep passes weren’t there, the Seahawks weren’t operating with a quick passing game like you’d expect, leading to a dramatic decrease in offensive production over the second half of the season and in Seattle’s playoff loss to the Los Angeles Rams.

Wilson, meanwhile, has lost his early-season grip on the MVP race.

"He needs to play better," Seahawks offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer said. "He knows that. We can't turn the ball over."

"The turnovers, he knows he has to be better with that," Schottenheimer said. "He knows that. We coach him no different than everybody else. It's nonnegotiable. You have to take care of the football. There's big momentum swings. We always want to be one of the top teams in the league at taking care of the football. He's always going to be a guy that's been that way. He's normally a single-digit interception guy. He understands that."

He's a good player but not at the level some think he is at. Now Schottenheimer was fired so things should be back to normal. Playoff fodder.

Posted: **Fri Feb 12, 2021 11:57 am**

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 8:39 am
StumpHunter wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 9:40 pm

It is in a different thread and not deleted because it was a great point. It is not so cut and dry like your quote that isn't a quote, and there is more to it than just the cap, but Wilson is the 3rd highest paid QB in the NFL and the biggest reason his team can't afford to pay for better Olinemen. He is not an "overrated passer" like some have called him, so he is worth the money, but even with a top 3 QB that kind of cap hit hurts teams.

These QBs, Rodgers, Wilson and Watson complain about the teams around them while eating up 15% of the cap. Not that I blame them for wanting make as much as they can, but if they truly wanted a better team, they would take a pay cut so their team could spend the money on a better line or adding weapons.

I am not alone in my opinion of Wilson's cap hit making it more difficult for Seattle to build an Oline, it is a pretty common opinion among Seahawk fans.
Dude that's not the way it works. This is the quarterback market. They are the highest paid players in the NFL. Guys like Brady and Brees taking pay cuts are rare occasions and can even sometimes warrant that given their age. But you cant expect a guy in his prime to take a paycut to make the team around him better at that position.

No less the biggest takeaway here....GMs CHOOSE where to spend their money and CHOOSE what position to take in each round of the draft. It's not like Seattle has some great defense that they are dumping all of this money into. They were one of the worst in the NFL. If anything, it's on the GM that they havent done a good job protecting him. You cant fault Russell Wilson for that. I've said for years now that Wilson has a terrible OL. And I know for a fact many on here were arguing with me last year and prior saying that wasnt the case. You might have been one of them. Who knows with the amount of pis#ing matches we've had and I dont really have the time to look back.

But regardless, Seattle chose not to invest in their OL. No different than Spielman choosing not to invest at guard. That's on them, not the QB. I'm not sure what you expect these QBs to accept for contracts but I can tell you that you're way off whatever it is. It's like you got caught up in Keenum doing well in 2017 making $2 million and think QBs shouldnt get paid like they do. Idk. And on top of all that, offensive lines arent even built through free agency. They are built through the draft first and then filled by free agency. Which also proves even further that money has nothing to do with it. Draft picks dont cost teams endless cap space. If you arent drafting offensive lineman and attempting to protect your QB then that's your problem.

The last 4 draft classes, they went with the following:
2017- 2nd round C, 6th round OT
2018- 5th round OT
2019- 4th round OG
2020- 3rd round OG

....what does that have anything to do with Russell Wilsons contract? Absolutely nothing. That's just simply neglect on the GMs part.

Many say Spielman has neglected the OL at times and his last 4 years look like this:
2017- 3rd round C, 5th round OG
2018- 2nd round OT, 6th round OG
2019- 1st round C, 4th round OG, 6th round OT
2020- 2nd round OT, 6th round OT, 7th round OG

We've drafted double the offensive lineman Seattle has in the last 4 years and guys believes Spielman neglects the OL....

Spielmans problem is look above at the early round picks....2 centers and 2 tackles. The problem is, he's not investing early enough at the guard position because following the early rounds, he's drafted 4 guards. It's like he's still fishing for the Joe Berger, Brandon Fusco, John Sullivan, Matt Birk's of the world in the later rounds. He needs to just simply invest in an early round guard. Which granted, there havent been many first round guards lately but at least a 2nd-3rd rounder. And sadly I dont think it will happen this year given Zimmer will be hell bent on fixing the defense.

Either way, if your offensive line unit has been bad for years and you continue to ignore it like Seattle has, that's on the GM and Pete Carroll. Not Russell Wilson. No different than the Vikings. Kirk Cousins contract isnt preventing Spielman and Zim from fixing the OL (mainly guard). That is there choice and they've chosen not to invest in either guard spot.

At some point, there's going to need to be a course correction here. The league just can't keep paying QBs these ridiculous salaries without either raising the cap significantly or leveling off their contracts.

In 2022, Kirk Cousins will account for 20% of the Vikings' cap, and that's only if the cap returns to pre-Covid levels by then. I don't care how you manage your roster, if you have $200 million to spend on salaries and you spend $40 million of it on one player, quarterback or any other position, it's going to leave you short in other positions. There's only so much to go around on a 53-man roster.

I'm not arguing with you, PHP. You're right. This is the current climate. I'm just saying that at some point, it's got to correct itself. Simply being a starting veteran quarterback these days puts you in the $20-million-a-year range, minimum. It's ridiculous. I can't wait to see what Kansas City does once the big part of Patrick Mahomes' contract kicks in. His 2027 hit, for example, is $59.95 million. However, his deal is only guaranteed through 2024. I have to believe there's no way the Chiefs actually will be willing to pay $60 million to one player, so what will they do?

I certainly wouldn't want to return to the days when pro football players had to have jobs in the offseason to make ends meet (and I'm old enough to have been alive for those days). But holy cow, things are way out of balance right now. The NFL is a cash cow, so it'll survive. But I'm really curious to see where all this lands in the next 5 years.

Posted: **Fri Feb 12, 2021 1:07 pm**

J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 11:57 am
At some point, there's going to need to be a course correction here. The league just can't keep paying QBs these ridiculous salaries without either raising the cap significantly or leveling off their contracts.

Right and I dont necessarily agree with their salaries but I also dont see anything changing. This year was also a weird year so who knows.

In 2022, Kirk Cousins will account for 20% of the Vikings' cap, and that's only if the cap returns to pre-Covid levels by then. I don't care how you manage your roster, if you have $200 million to spend on salaries and you spend $40 million of it on one player, quarterback or any other position, it's going to leave you short in other positions. There's only so much to go around on a 53-man roster.

I get what you're saying, but I also take Cousins 2022 pay with a very very fine grain of salt. I would say there is a 99.9% chance that Kirk Cousins does NOT play under a contract that pays him $45 million next year. He will be restructured, cut, or traded before the Vikings do that. I'd bet my bank account on it.

I'm not arguing with you, PHP. You're right. This is the current climate. I'm just saying that at some point, it's got to correct itself. Simply being a starting veteran quarterback these days puts you in the $20-million-a-year range, minimum. It's ridiculous. I can't wait to see what Kansas City does once the big part of Patrick Mahomes' contract kicks in. His 2027 hit, for example, is $59.95 million. However, his deal is only guaranteed through 2024. I have to believe there's no way the Chiefs actually will be willing to pay $60 million to one player, so what will they do?

Yeah the Chiefs better enjoy their run now because that is a contract that is eventually going to murder a roster. In 2027 that would pay Mahomes double what Kirk Cousins made playing for the Vikings this year. That is insane.

I certainly wouldn't want to return to the days when pro football players had to have jobs in the offseason to make ends meet (and I'm old enough to have been alive for those days). But holy cow, things are way out of balance right now. The NFL is a cash cow, so it'll survive. But I'm really curious to see where all this lands in the next 5 years.

Yeah same here. Given GMs were expecting the cap to go up every year and then COVID hits and it doesnt, put some teams in a serious world of hurt. The Saints and Eagles being two of them. So many say the Vikings are in "cap hell" yet they are only 24th in cap space. Still not great but there are some teams that are in HUGE trouble. To the point where they wont even be able to afford putting a competitive roster on the field.

Like look at the Saints. Brees basically decided to accept vet minimum and they are STILL $70+ million OVER the cap. Like how in the world do you even recover from that? We're around $7 million over which is manageable. However there are some teams in some deep, deep crap.

Posted: **Fri Feb 12, 2021 1:32 pm**

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 1:07 pm
In 2022, Kirk Cousins will account for 20% of the Vikings' cap, and that's only if the cap returns to pre-Covid levels by then. I don't care how you manage your roster, if you have $200 million to spend on salaries and you spend $40 million of it on one player, quarterback or any other position, it's going to leave you short in other positions. There's only so much to go around on a 53-man roster.
I get what you're saying, but I also take Cousins 2022 pay with a very very fine grain of salt. I would say there is a 99.9% chance that Kirk Cousins does NOT play under a contract that pays him $45 million next year. He will be restructured, cut, or traded before the Vikings do that. I'd bet my bank account on it.

You might want to hide that account number.

Cousins' 2022 base salary of $35 million becomes fully guaranteed on the third day of the 2021 league year. That's about 5 weeks from now.

If the Vikings want to trade him after his guaranteed salary kicks in, then they'd have to be able to find someone willing to take on, at a minimum, his $35 million 2022 salary against their cap. I just don't see any team willing to sacrifice that much cap space for Kirk Cousins, even for a single year. I could be wrong. Maybe there's a team that would do it, like if the 49ers get stuck with China Doll Garoppolo again and Shanahan really, really gets a woody for Cousins. Other than that, I just don't see it.

Of course, if the Vikings trade Cousins before March 20, they incur $20 million of dead cap.

The Vikings are kinda stuck sleeping in a bed they've made with burlap sheets.

Posted: **Fri Feb 12, 2021 4:26 pm**

CharVike wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 11:21 am Wilson went to two Super Bowls. That D was one of the best if not the best in NFL history. He cost the team in the playoffs this year. Pick 6 and there wasn't any pressure at all. Bad read bad throw. His turnover ratio was very high this year.

But for a brief stretch from Week 7 to Week 10, quarterback Russell Wilson had 10 turnovers and the Seahawks lost three of four. That prompted a change from the pass-heavy approach to a more balanced look.

While Seattle started to run more, the passing game started to really slow down as teams started to play with two-high safeties and took away deep passes. That led to far fewer explosive plays and even though those deep passes weren’t there, the Seahawks weren’t operating with a quick passing game like you’d expect, leading to a dramatic decrease in offensive production over the second half of the season and in Seattle’s playoff loss to the Los Angeles Rams.

Wilson, meanwhile, has lost his early-season grip on the MVP race.

"He needs to play better," Seahawks offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer said. "He knows that. We can't turn the ball over."

"The turnovers, he knows he has to be better with that," Schottenheimer said. "He knows that. We coach him no different than everybody else. It's nonnegotiable. You have to take care of the football. There's big momentum swings. We always want to be one of the top teams in the league at taking care of the football. He's always going to be a guy that's been that way. He's normally a single-digit interception guy. He understands that."

He's a good player but not at the level some think he is at. Now Schottenheimer was fired so things should be back to normal. Playoff fodder.

I agree that his performance was lacking parts of this year. It really looked like he was pressing and trying to do too much. On a better team, he's going to flourish.

Posted: **Fri Feb 12, 2021 5:12 pm**

J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 11:57 am At some point, there's going to need to be a course correction here. The league just can't keep paying QBs these ridiculous salaries without either raising the cap significantly or leveling off their contracts.

This situation reminds me of the rookie contract situation before the league negotiated controls on rookie contracts. Before that deal went into effect, high 1st round picks were routinely holding out for mega deals that far exceeded what many established and productive veterans could command. Few of those picks ended up performing anywhere near what their draft position would have suggested, and in a cap-constrained league, that meant money effective was being shifted away from established, productive veterans to untested and in many cases unproductive rookies.

So in that case, the CBA was modified to create a capped pool of dollars for rookie contracts. As a result, few rookies or players on rookie deals have any motivation to hold out, and the cap and resulting penalties for holding out while on a rookie deal both serve as strong deterrents.

I wonder if something like that will be necessary for QB contracts as well. Since having a "franchise" QB is a key component necessary for most teams to remain consistently competitive, and since few veteran QBs are willing to take less for the team, they kind of have teams over the barrel so-to-speak. Granted, not every QB can command that kind of money, but it does seem obvious that many teams are willing to stretch substantially when it comes to paying even more average QBs just so they can at least appear to be competitive.

Since those large contracts affect the larger player pool every bit as much as the rookie contract situation did at one point, it seems almost inevitable that the owners would bring up some reasonable limits on QB pay at some point, and further that they'd probably get support from the players as well because there are far more non-QBs in the league than QBs. Something reasonable would be a yearly max that is indexed to the cap number for the year the QB plays. That might mean some QBs are getting paid relatively more than they're production would indicate relative to other QBs, but at the same time, it prevents the QB contract "PacMan" from gobbling up so many cap dollars that teams are literally unable to keep their core veteran talent together.

Or, maybe market forces will eventually dictate this. Teams that overpay simply don't compete and don't win and therefore have less incentive to repeat their mistakes. But that seems unlikely as there are enough unknowns and potential excuses for failing to win that a middling QB could successfully argue that injuries, bad calls, poor execution in other areas of the team, coaches, etc., are the reason he didn't take the team to the Superbowl.

It seems far more likely, and far more effective, for the owners and players to just agree on capping off contracts in such a way to continue to promote the overall competitiveness within the sport, and just as with the rookie deals, if market forces are unbalancing that competitiveness, the CBA can be adjusted to bring it back into a desirable range while still providing incentives to excel.

Posted: **Fri Feb 12, 2021 5:23 pm**

this is an interesting topic.

the "elite QB required to win SB" crowd often points to %of recent SBs won by an elite QB (and it's definitely a fair and compelling point). But could that at least partially be due to the fact that teams WITHOUT elite QBs still pay their QB elite $$$? So those teams have all of the Salary Cap problems as teams with elite QBs, without the elite QB? Of course a team with an elite QB (and holes all over the roster due to the elite QB salary) will usually beat a team with an average QB (and holes all over the roster due to the elite QB salary).

How many models are out there of a veteran game manager journeyman average QB, with an elite D, great OL, and good skill position players?

I don't know....just a thought

Posted: **Sat Feb 13, 2021 12:02 am**

chicagopurple wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:52 pm no one else really wanted cousins...most GMs knew he was not the guy who commands a Brady Salary.....only SPielman was willing to jump the shark.....and Cousins knows he is not an elite QB but he was offered Elite $$s....so yeah, he came to MN....woo flippin hoo

When he was a free agent the Broncos, Jets, Cardinals and others tried to get him. If we cut him right now teams would be lining up again. Or would he be out of the NFL? What is elite $$ mean. The only way to get a good starter for nothing is through the draft. We've been on that train forever. From Kramer to Bridgewater. Never got it. The Saints backup QB gets 10 mill +. Starters are expensive even if some think they blow. It's the hardest position in football.

Posted: **Sat Feb 13, 2021 12:32 am**

VikingPaul73 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 5:23 pm this is an interesting topic.

the "elite QB required to win SB" crowd often points to %of recent SBs won by an elite QB (and it's definitely a fair and compelling point). But could that at least partially be due to the fact that teams WITHOUT elite QBs still pay their QB elite $$$? So those teams have all of the Salary Cap problems as teams with elite QBs, without the elite QB? Of course a team with an elite QB (and holes all over the roster due to the elite QB salary) will usually beat a team with an average QB (and holes all over the roster due to the elite QB salary).

How many models are out there of a veteran game manager journeyman average QB, with an elite D, great OL, and good skill position players?

I don't know....just a thought

Foles comes to mind. But the Eagles didn't have an elite anything. We might have had a better chance against Wentz. Foles got hot at the right time. The Bears tried him and he reverted back to backup status. But people throw the great and elite tag on any QB. Based on what the Lions got in a trade Stafford is elite. To me he's a good starter but I don't see him close to Rodgers who I would say is elite. I don't see a guy close to him except the god Brady who is better of course. There's no easy answer for QB tags.

Posted: **Mon Feb 15, 2021 9:04 am**

CharVike wrote: ↑Sat Feb 13, 2021 12:32 am
VikingPaul73 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 5:23 pm this is an interesting topic.

the "elite QB required to win SB" crowd often points to %of recent SBs won by an elite QB (and it's definitely a fair and compelling point). But could that at least partially be due to the fact that teams WITHOUT elite QBs still pay their QB elite $$$? So those teams have all of the Salary Cap problems as teams with elite QBs, without the elite QB? Of course a team with an elite QB (and holes all over the roster due to the elite QB salary) will usually beat a team with an average QB (and holes all over the roster due to the elite QB salary).

How many models are out there of a veteran game manager journeyman average QB, with an elite D, great OL, and good skill position players?

I don't know....just a thought
Foles comes to mind. But the Eagles didn't have an elite anything. We might have had a better chance against Wentz. Foles got hot at the right time. The Bears tried him and he reverted back to backup status. But people throw the great and elite tag on any QB. Based on what the Lions got in a trade Stafford is elite. To me he's a good starter but I don't see him close to Rodgers who I would say is elite. I don't see a guy close to him except the god Brady who is better of course. There's no easy answer for QB tags.

I don't think you can use Foles for any sort of comparison since his case was so unique. Like you pointed out, he got hot at the right time and caught two really good defensive coaches off guard. If Bill and Zimmer had a season of film of Foles playing well in that Philly offense, there is no way he wins the SB.

Flacco was probably the last QB to win it all who was not in that elite category (Manning was a shell of his former self when he won, but he still had some of the skills that made him elite), and he was on his rookie deal when he won it.

Then you go back to Dilfer and Johnson for the next two non-HOF QBs who won it all. Both played on elite teams and only Johnson was making average starting QB money when he won it of those two and he was under that 10 % of the cap mark.

All that to say, winning it all with Cousins and his contract would be a first in the salary cap era.

Posted: **Mon Feb 15, 2021 7:26 pm**

808vikingsfan wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 2:29 am
chicagopurple wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 1:47 pm no top tier QB is going to consider MN....we have no OL. We have an out dated Coach who refuses input from others. Nothing good will happen till Wilf cleans house......good luck with that.
Kirk always has the highest Time to Throw measurement for non scrambling QB's. He's always near the 2.8-3.0 mark Any mobile QB that comes here will have enough time. Tired of hearing that as an excuse. Kirk is indecisive and holds on to the ball too long. It's been an issue for 8 years.

Kirk is a non scrambling or non mobile or non movement QB. I don't even know what that means. I call it a stick in the mud a guy that can't move at all. I've seen Cousins run for 1st downs and not just 2 inches. Beyond all that I don't want a QB that is a runner. Sooner or later it will end the hard way. Lamar Jackson is probably the best running QB and he puts up 1000 + yards. Can't score in the playoffs. It's pathetic. These defensive players have pride also and there will come a time when the wood will get laid to him and then say bye bye. Next man up and then the team is done. Russell Wilson is crying about his OL. Every team has OL problems. The Cheifs OL wasn't that great even before some guys got hurt. PFF has the Packer OL rated at number 2. That OL blows. The last two years in the playoffs they were blown off the map. The 49ers and Bucs destroyed them. Those two teams don't have nothing close to historical pass rushing teams. Wilson is passing the buck. When he lost the opening playoff game to a wild card team this year his pick six did them in. There wasn't a defender close to him. That should have been a Hawks TD. One pump fake and then boom the WR would have been wide open because the CB jumped the play. He lacks that type of ability. Kirk threw 35 TDs this year. Is that terrible production? Watson had 33 and he's considered the best on earth by many. I know there's more than TDs but that can't be thrown in the garbage either. Indecisive QBs don't throw that many TDs.

Posted: **Mon Feb 15, 2021 8:40 pm**

VikingLord wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 5:12 pm
J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 11:57 am At some point, there's going to need to be a course correction here. The league just can't keep paying QBs these ridiculous salaries without either raising the cap significantly or leveling off their contracts.
This situation reminds me of the rookie contract situation before the league negotiated controls on rookie contracts. Before that deal went into effect, high 1st round picks were routinely holding out for mega deals that far exceeded what many established and productive veterans could command. Few of those picks ended up performing anywhere near what their draft position would have suggested, and in a cap-constrained league, that meant money effective was being shifted away from established, productive veterans to untested and in many cases unproductive rookies.

So in that case, the CBA was modified to create a capped pool of dollars for rookie contracts. As a result, few rookies or players on rookie deals have any motivation to hold out, and the cap and resulting penalties for holding out while on a rookie deal both serve as strong deterrents.

I wonder if something like that will be necessary for QB contracts as well. Since having a "franchise" QB is a key component necessary for most teams to remain consistently competitive, and since few veteran QBs are willing to take less for the team, they kind of have teams over the barrel so-to-speak. Granted, not every QB can command that kind of money, but it does seem obvious that many teams are willing to stretch substantially when it comes to paying even more average QBs just so they can at least appear to be competitive.

Since those large contracts affect the larger player pool every bit as much as the rookie contract situation did at one point, it seems almost inevitable that the owners would bring up some reasonable limits on QB pay at some point, and further that they'd probably get support from the players as well because there are far more non-QBs in the league than QBs. Something reasonable would be a yearly max that is indexed to the cap number for the year the QB plays. That might mean some QBs are getting paid relatively more than they're production would indicate relative to other QBs, but at the same time, it prevents the QB contract "PacMan" from gobbling up so many cap dollars that teams are literally unable to keep their core veteran talent together.

Or, maybe market forces will eventually dictate this. Teams that overpay simply don't compete and don't win and therefore have less incentive to repeat their mistakes. But that seems unlikely as there are enough unknowns and potential excuses for failing to win that a middling QB could successfully argue that injuries, bad calls, poor execution in other areas of the team, coaches, etc., are the reason he didn't take the team to the Superbowl.

It seems far more likely, and far more effective, for the owners and players to just agree on capping off contracts in such a way to continue to promote the overall competitiveness within the sport, and just as with the rookie deals, if market forces are unbalancing that competitiveness, the CBA can be adjusted to bring it back into a desirable range while still providing incentives to excel.

The CBA and rookies was a great thing for veteran players and fans. For fans you don't see those rookie hold outs anymore. For vet players they get more money. Starting QBs should get the biggest payday. The NFL needs QBs, That's always been the case. The CAP started in 94 and Aikman hit the jackpot. It eventually tore that Cowboy team apart because of the Aikman deal. They had no choice. The same will happen to the Cheifs. But the CAP allows teams to come out of nowhere and get into the tournament. At that point it's open season. I think it's better than the old days when once a team was built they were in for some time. Like Grant's early 70s teams. Or the Cowboys ect... The Falcons have done it with Ryan but they have also been a dog with him. But Ryan always gave them the chance to come back into the tournament and go all the way.

Vikings Message Board.Com

Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out

Re: Russel Wilson Possibly Wants Out