Kirk Cousins (Traded to Vikings)

Las Vegas Raiders Discussion.
Born from RF.net ruins, resurrected as RF.com, now arriving at Raiderstation.
The #1 Las Vegas Raiders site on the web!
User avatar
Reno Hightower
Posts: 3,251
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2024 4:59 pm
Has given High Fives: 827 times
Received High Fives: 1235 times

Kirk Cousins (Traded to Vikings)

Unread post by Reno Hightower »

I have rarely seen a QB do more with less. Kubiak has made it clear that he is the guy this year but his play has really defied conventional wisdom. The run blocking is as putrid as it was last season. The pass blocking has been getting compliments but how much as that has to do with Cousins's pocket presence and pre snap reads?

I am not sure the subject deserves its own thread but I think what he has accomplished this season cannot be overstated and he has essentially put the offense on his back. I don't think anyone saw this coming.

Thoughts?...
These users gave a High Five to the author Reno Hightower for the post (total 5):
Rabidraider, Steve007, mranquales, GoodTimeCharlie, Amish Cabal
User avatar
Cruisin with Tooz
Posts: 1,808
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2024 11:43 am
Has given High Fives: 240 times
Received High Fives: 539 times

Unread post by Cruisin with Tooz »

DanKD wrote: Wed Nov 11, 2026 5:59 pm Maybe Vikings were stuck on a 4th with conditions to become a 3rd. We have no idea how negotiations went.
Pick 96 is the upgrade? Youre saying Minnesota wanted something like pick ~118 for KC if Minn doesnt make the post season and upgraded to pick 96 assuming that KC brings a SB win? That doesnt add up for me. Minnesota probably wouldnt make the playoffs with Wentz. Trading them the guy that takes them from a nonplayoff team to a SB winner is worth far more than pick 96. I suspect every one on this site would give away much more than pick 96 every single year for a SB appearance.
User avatar
DanKD
Posts: 3,802
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:18 pm
Has given High Fives: 44 times
Received High Fives: 1498 times

Unread post by DanKD »

Cruisin with Tooz wrote: Wed Nov 11, 2026 8:10 pm Pick 96 is the upgrade? Youre saying Minnesota wanted something like pick ~118 for KC if Minn doesnt make the post season and upgraded to pick 96 assuming that KC brings a SB win? That doesnt add up for me. Minnesota probably wouldnt make the playoffs with Wentz. Trading them the guy that takes them from a nonplayoff team to a SB winner is worth far more than pick 96. I suspect every one on this site would give away much more than pick 96 every single year for a SB appearance.
We traded them 38 year old Kirk Cousins, not Josh Allen. This helps them and I hope Kirk does well but theres no guarantee this does anything for them in regards to the superbowl
These users gave a High Five to the author DanKD for the post:
raiderboyron
User avatar
GoodTimeCharlie
Posts: 5,095
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2020 6:26 pm
Location: Atop the commode
Has given High Fives: 1662 times
Received High Fives: 1700 times

Unread post by GoodTimeCharlie »

Interesting…

These users gave a High Five to the author GoodTimeCharlie for the post:
chucker
User avatar
LayneStaley
Posts: 4,523
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:29 pm
Has given High Fives: 346 times
Received High Fives: 878 times

Unread post by LayneStaley »

If Cousins wants to come ride the pine for the Mendoza Dynasty and is willing to do it dirt cheap I’d be thrilled to have him back. I really don’t think his game is about athleticism, it’s the intangibles he brings.
User avatar
chucker
Gold JacketThe JudgeBowersFernando
Posts: 17,206
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2013 7:53 am
Has given High Fives: 2251 times
Received High Fives: 2960 times

Unread post by chucker »

The Vikings were going nowhere with Wentz and the midget. They are more likely to go somewhere with Cousins but does anyone really believe they're getting it done with Cousins and his slow feet and noodle arm? Is it that hard to believe that they simply would not have paid more than a third for a 38 year old with the worst physical skillset of any NFL starter - who they already moved on from once?

Hold out for a 2, and there's a damn good chance you get nothing at all.
These users gave a High Five to the author chucker for the post (total 4):
NoThanksSir, DanKD, Trainnvain, raiderboyron
User avatar
Attyla
Gold JacketSnake3 Mile Lyle
Posts: 52,872
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 4:31 pm
Has given High Fives: 1270 times
Received High Fives: 3051 times

Unread post by Attyla »

chucker wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2026 6:13 am The Vikings were going nowhere with Wentz and the midget. They are more likely to go somewhere with Cousins but does anyone really believe they're getting it done with Cousins and his slow feet and noodle arm? Is it that hard to believe that they simply would not have paid more than a third for a 38 year old with the worst physical skillset of any NFL starter - who they already moved on from once?

Hold out for a 2, and there's a damn good chance you get nothing at all.
Had there been a bidding war, I doubt anyone would have offered more than a top level 3.
These users gave a High Five to the author Attyla for the post (total 2):
chucker, raiderboyron
User avatar
chucker
Gold JacketThe JudgeBowersFernando
Posts: 17,206
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2013 7:53 am
Has given High Fives: 2251 times
Received High Fives: 2960 times

Unread post by chucker »

LayneStaley wrote: Wed Nov 11, 2026 9:34 pm If Cousins wants to come ride the pine for the Mendoza Dynasty and is willing to do it dirt cheap I’d be thrilled to have him back. I really don’t think his game is about athleticism, it’s the intangibles he brings.
Cousins doesn't do anything dirt cheap. If he plays half decent the rest of the year then he'll be a starter somewhere next year and probably get at least $30 million to do it.
User avatar
Willmark
Posts: 14,983
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 2:27 pm
Location: Keeper of THE COIN!
Has given High Fives: 1236 times
Received High Fives: 1110 times

Unread post by Willmark »

chucker wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2026 6:13 am The Vikings were going nowhere with Wentz and the midget. They are more likely to go somewhere with Cousins but does anyone really believe they're getting it done with Cousins and his slow feet and noodle arm? Is it that hard to believe that they simply would not have paid more than a third for a 38 year old with the worst physical skillset of any NFL starter - who they already moved on from once?

Hold out for a 2, and there's a damn good chance you get nothing at all.
It’s possible they don’t end up trading with the Raiders but they had to do something especially after Monday night.

They also didn’t have a lot of options that moved the needle and couldn’t stay with what they have. What were the other options? Whatever one thinks of Jones that was about the only other option they had.

And starting a 5th and getting to a 3rd? Thats good but how good? We’ll never know for sure.

In the end we got something and cleared 10 million. That alone is good. But the Vikes were not negotiating from a position of strength IMO.
These users gave a High Five to the author Willmark for the post:
chucker
User avatar
BoKnows81
Bo Knows
Posts: 7,370
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 3:36 am
Has given High Fives: 903 times
Received High Fives: 2042 times

Unread post by BoKnows81 »

chucker wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2026 6:13 am The Vikings were going nowhere with Wentz and the midget. They are more likely to go somewhere with Cousins but does anyone really believe they're getting it done with Cousins and his slow feet and noodle arm? Is it that hard to believe that they simply would not have paid more than a third for a 38 year old with the worst physical skillset of any NFL starter - who they already moved on from once?

Hold out for a 2, and there's a damn good chance you get nothing at all.
I'm not so sure about that. If the Raiders had a top 2 defense, we'd likely be 7-2 or 6-3, and that's with a gauntlet of a schedule. The Vikings are 6-2 now and IMO adding Cousins alone gives them at least 5-6 more wins. That defense will be tough in the playoffs and there's zero reason why they cant make a run to the superbowl now. Without him, they stood no chance.

Again, happy with the trade but it's not against the law to admit we didnt get max value from a desperate team in a superbowl window. Not to mention the Vikings could still keep him next year, so it isnt necessarily a 1 year rental.
These users gave a High Five to the author BoKnows81 for the post:
Willmark
User avatar
Reno Hightower
Posts: 3,251
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2024 4:59 pm
Has given High Fives: 827 times
Received High Fives: 1235 times

Unread post by Reno Hightower »

BoKnows81 wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2026 6:53 am I'm not so sure about that. If the Raiders had a top 2 defense, we'd likely be 7-2 or 6-3, and that's with a gauntlet of a schedule. The Vikings are 6-2 now and IMO adding Cousins alone gives them at least 5-6 more wins. That defense will be tough in the playoffs and there's zero reason why they cant make a run to the superbowl.

Again, happy with the trade but it's not against the law to admit we didnt get max value from a desperate team in a superbowl window.
The Vikings are also replenishing the soda machine in the locker room for the year. I also hear that Mark got a PF Changs gift card.
User avatar
mstrbass2000
SnakeThe AssassinBo KnowsMad StorkBowersFernandoJeantyMan from Mars
Posts: 2,409
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2026 10:49 am
Has given High Fives: 851 times
Received High Fives: 1115 times

Unread post by mstrbass2000 »

i think this trade for the vikings put em in the super bowl hunt, for the raiders it gives em an xtra 3rd rd pick and mobility to move up and and down the board to fill more holes and add quality depth plus dont forget the xtra 10 million in cap room to add free agent/agents
These users gave a High Five to the author mstrbass2000 for the post:
chucker
User avatar
BoKnows81
Bo Knows
Posts: 7,370
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 3:36 am
Has given High Fives: 903 times
Received High Fives: 2042 times

Unread post by BoKnows81 »

User avatar
Hellbound
Woodson WhiskeySeabass
Posts: 6,816
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 11:21 am
Has given High Fives: 657 times
Received High Fives: 1091 times

Unread post by Hellbound »

chucker wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2026 6:13 am The Vikings were going nowhere with Wentz and the midget. They are more likely to go somewhere with Cousins but does anyone really believe they're getting it done with Cousins and his slow feet and noodle arm? Is it that hard to believe that they simply would not have paid more than a third for a 38 year old with the worst physical skillset of any NFL starter - who they already moved on from once?

Hold out for a 2, and there's a damn good chance you get nothing at all.
Agreed 100% everyone pointed out his weaknesses every week. You don't think other coaches and gms saw the same things? Add in his age and he's a rental, and a 10 million payment, he really doesn't have much value. I also don't think he puts them over the top. He gives them solid play but in no way is a difference maker
These users gave a High Five to the author Hellbound for the post:
chucker
User avatar
Hellbound
Woodson WhiskeySeabass
Posts: 6,816
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 11:21 am
Has given High Fives: 657 times
Received High Fives: 1091 times

Unread post by Hellbound »

Of course a divisional foe hc is going to be salty that another team in the division improved
These users gave a High Five to the author Hellbound for the post (total 3):
chucker, raiderboyron, dred
User avatar
chucker
Gold JacketThe JudgeBowersFernando
Posts: 17,206
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2013 7:53 am
Has given High Fives: 2251 times
Received High Fives: 2960 times

Unread post by chucker »

BoKnows81 wrote: Thu Nov 12, 2026 6:53 am I'm not so sure about that. If the Raiders had a top 2 defense, we'd likely be 7-2 or 6-3, and that's with a gauntlet of a schedule. The Vikings are 6-2 now and IMO adding Cousins alone gives them at least 5-6 more wins. That defense will be tough in the playoffs and there's zero reason why they cant make a run to the superbowl now. Without him, they stood no chance.

Again, happy with the trade but it's not against the law to admit we didnt get max value from a desperate team in a superbowl window. Not to mention the Vikings could still keep him next year, so it isnt necessarily a 1 year rental.
Is it possible that we could have squeezed out more value? Sure. Is it also possible that we got max value that the one team looking to trade for a starting QB was willing to give? Sure. Cousins just isn't all that good, even if he was better this year than what most of us thought he would be.
Post Reply