What's your ideal scenario over the next 3 months?

@"supafreak84" said:

@"VikeMike52" said:

@"Bullazin" said: Broncos at 12 and Raiders at 13 will most likely take QB4 and 5.  After that the pickings get slim at QB

@"Bullazin" said: Broncos at 12 and Raiders at 13 will most likely take QB4 and 5.  After that the pickings get slim at QB

I’ve seen a few mocks with both of those taking either McCarthy or Nix. If McCarthy is the Vikings preferred QB they may have to take him at 11, that is if he makes it out of the top 10.

Matt Miller of ESPN just released a new mock with the Vikings taking Dallas Turner at 11, followed by the Broncos taking Nix at 12, and the Raiders taking McCarthy at 13 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"medaille" said: I think the ideal off season involves having a good QB and getting like 4 starters out of the draft, meaning guys are dropping and us getting lucky because teams missed them.

 

That’s not hardly a plan though, but something more
tangible:

1. Resign Cousins to a 2 year deal that’s probably something like $60M guaranteed with $20M more in incentives and an out after 1 year if he’s unable to really perform due to the injury, but gives him security if he’s healthy.
2. Resign Hunter to a good contract that you can get out of in like 3 years max.
3. Resign JJ to a contract that doesn’t make me cringe a lot.
4. Resign Davenport to be our 3rd OLB for like $6M prove it deal.
5. Draft a QB with our first or second pick without giving up the farm to get them.  I’m skeptical that we’re going to get one of the top 3 guys, so I just don’t see how it makes sense to invest multiple high picks in getting the 5th best prospect.  I’d rather draft the 5th best prospect 2 years in a row, than invest 3+ picks into the 4th best guy.  If there’s a guy you feel really confident in that fits your system and you’re sure that everyone else is misreading, sure go after that guy, but I think the list of guys that fail after teams traded up for them is probably just as long as guys that succeeded.  This guys probably going to have some flaws and need to sit for a year.  End of the first makes sense to me.
6. Have to get a second impact edge or DL.
7. Have to get a quality RB that can both run and block at a low cost.
8. Have to bring in another competent starting caliber CB.

6-8, Here you are really dependent on
how you get that QB, ie. Did you blow all your draft picks?  You’re probably going to have to pick up a CB
or an Edge in free agency if you draft a QB, unless you get really lucky.  I think if you blow a ton of picks on a QB you're probably building for 2025 rather than 2024, so you're more going for overall roster quality than win now as you'll have to be more frugal in FA to make up for the missing draft picks.

It would cost us half as much to move from 42 to 16 as it would to move from 11 to 3. Draft your edge at 11 (there are three with strong value in the 8-15 range--Verse, Turner and Latu). Draft QB4 at 16. Sign Cousins, Hunter and a pass rushing DT in free agency. Use a 4th or FA for a RB.

That gives you Cousins, JJ, Addison, Hock, Darrisaw and O'Neill on offense. Your front seven now has Hunter, Wilkins (FA1), Phillips and Turner (D1). This is a team that would be serious contenders in '24 with a succession plan at QB in place—not to mention $130M in cap space in '25—to keep them there. 

@"StickyBun" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"VikeMike52" said:

@"Bullazin" said: Broncos at 12 and Raiders at 13 will most likely take QB4 and 5.  After that the pickings get slim at QB

@"Bullazin" said: Broncos at 12 and Raiders at 13 will most likely take QB4 and 5.  After that the pickings get slim at QB

I’ve seen a few mocks with both of those taking either McCarthy or Nix. If McCarthy is the Vikings preferred QB they may have to take him at 11, that is if he makes it out of the top 10.

Matt Miller of ESPN just released a new mock with the Vikings taking Dallas Turner at 11, followed by the Broncos taking Nix at 12, and the Raiders taking McCarthy at 13 

lol, this would explode people's heads. The pitchforks would be marching to Eagan. 

@"StickyBun" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"VikeMike52" said:

@"Bullazin" said: Broncos at 12 and Raiders at 13 will most likely take QB4 and 5.  After that the pickings get slim at QB

@"Bullazin" said: Broncos at 12 and Raiders at 13 will most likely take QB4 and 5.  After that the pickings get slim at QB

I’ve seen a few mocks with both of those taking either McCarthy or Nix. If McCarthy is the Vikings preferred QB they may have to take him at 11, that is if he makes it out of the top 10.

Matt Miller of ESPN just released a new mock with the Vikings taking Dallas Turner at 11, followed by the Broncos taking Nix at 12, and the Raiders taking McCarthy at 13 

lol, this would explode people's heads. The pitchforks would be marching to Eagan. 

@"supafreak84" said:

@"VikeMike52" said:

@"Bullazin" said: Broncos at 12 and Raiders at 13 will most likely take QB4 and 5.  After that the pickings get slim at QB

@"Bullazin" said: Broncos at 12 and Raiders at 13 will most likely take QB4 and 5.  After that the pickings get slim at QB

I’ve seen a few mocks with both of those taking either McCarthy or Nix. If McCarthy is the Vikings preferred QB they may have to take him at 11, that is if he makes it out of the top 10.

Matt Miller of ESPN just released a new mock with the Vikings taking Dallas Turner at 11, followed by the Broncos taking Nix at 12, and the Raiders taking McCarthy at 13 

@"StickyBun" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"VikeMike52" said:

@"Bullazin" said: Broncos at 12 and Raiders at 13 will most likely take QB4 and 5.  After that the pickings get slim at QB

@"Bullazin" said: Broncos at 12 and Raiders at 13 will most likely take QB4 and 5.  After that the pickings get slim at QB

I’ve seen a few mocks with both of those taking either McCarthy or Nix. If McCarthy is the Vikings preferred QB they may have to take him at 11, that is if he makes it out of the top 10.

Matt Miller of ESPN just released a new mock with the Vikings taking Dallas Turner at 11, followed by the Broncos taking Nix at 12, and the Raiders taking McCarthy at 13 

lol, this would explode people's heads. The pitchforks would be marching to Eagan. 

@"StickyBun" said: For me it would be as follows:

• Edge/DT at the #11 spot
• Move up for JJ McCarthy end of round 1
• Sign Kirk Cousins to 2-year contract

I'd be extremely stoked about this possibility. What's your ideal scenario?

@"Waterboy" said:

@"StickyBun" said: For me it would be as follows:

• Edge/DT at the #11 spot
• Move up for JJ McCarthy end of round 1
• Sign Kirk Cousins to 2-year contract

I'd be extremely stoked about this possibility. What's your ideal scenario?

This is where my head is at.  No matter what the Vikes need to get a future QB they like for the l-t.   Sign Cousins for no more than 1-2 years.  Let Hunter go, sign JJ to an extension and cut costs wherever necessary including O'Neill at RT.  Sign Darrisaw, let Harry go/retire.   It's time to tighten the belt, but keep JJ happy, get your QB of the future and an All-Pro LT.  Those are building blocks along with Addison.

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"Waterboy" said:

@"StickyBun" said: For me it would be as follows:

• Edge/DT at the #11 spot
• Move up for JJ McCarthy end of round 1
• Sign Kirk Cousins to 2-year contract

I'd be extremely stoked about this possibility. What's your ideal scenario?

This is where my head is at.  No matter what the Vikes need to get a future QB they like for the l-t.   Sign Cousins for no more than 1-2 years.  Let Hunter go, sign JJ to an extension and cut costs wherever necessary including O'Neill at RT.  Sign Darrisaw, let Harry go/retire.   It's time to tighten the belt, but keep JJ happy, get your QB of the future and an All-Pro LT.  Those are building blocks along with Addison.

Why do you keep Cousins if you are going to get rid of 1 of our 2 decent OL?  As it is Cousins will be a question mark,  if you are gonna go flea market,  then don't waste a dime on Cousins. 

If anything you would be more inclined to spend more on better OL so as not to piss away the money you spend on Cousins. 

@"Waterboy 

 Let Hunter go, 

f Kwesi let's Hunter walk, he looks bad.

The immediate question is why Kwesi decided not to trade him at the deadline last year.  

If hunter walks Vikings won't  receive a compensatory pick. 

@"Mattyman" said:

@"Waterboy 

 Let Hunter go, 

f Kwesi let's Hunter walk, he looks bad.

The immediate question is why Kwesi decided not to trade him at the deadline last year.  

If hunter walks Vikings won't  receive a compensatory pick. 

https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/39485211

Interesting video posted on ESPN today from the McAfee show in which Dan Orlovsky doesn't think there is any way the Vikings can pay both Jefferson and Cousins and the Vikings are probably going to have to move off Cousins, who he thinks will get 40+ million a year on a 3 year deal. Also floated the idea again about the Vikings trading Jefferson to New England to try to move up for a quarterback. 

@"HappyViking" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"medaille" said: I think the ideal off season involves having a good QB and getting like 4 starters out of the draft, meaning guys are dropping and us getting lucky because teams missed them.

 

That’s not hardly a plan though, but something more
tangible:

1. Resign Cousins to a 2 year deal that’s probably something like $60M guaranteed with $20M more in incentives and an out after 1 year if he’s unable to really perform due to the injury, but gives him security if he’s healthy.
2. Resign Hunter to a good contract that you can get out of in like 3 years max.
3. Resign JJ to a contract that doesn’t make me cringe a lot.
4. Resign Davenport to be our 3rd OLB for like $6M prove it deal.
5. Draft a QB with our first or second pick without giving up the farm to get them.  I’m skeptical that we’re going to get one of the top 3 guys, so I just don’t see how it makes sense to invest multiple high picks in getting the 5th best prospect.  I’d rather draft the 5th best prospect 2 years in a row, than invest 3+ picks into the 4th best guy.  If there’s a guy you feel really confident in that fits your system and you’re sure that everyone else is misreading, sure go after that guy, but I think the list of guys that fail after teams traded up for them is probably just as long as guys that succeeded.  This guys probably going to have some flaws and need to sit for a year.  End of the first makes sense to me.
6. Have to get a second impact edge or DL.
7. Have to get a quality RB that can both run and block at a low cost.
8. Have to bring in another competent starting caliber CB.

6-8, Here you are really dependent on
how you get that QB, ie. Did you blow all your draft picks?  You’re probably going to have to pick up a CB
or an Edge in free agency if you draft a QB, unless you get really lucky.  I think if you blow a ton of picks on a QB you're probably building for 2025 rather than 2024, so you're more going for overall roster quality than win now as you'll have to be more frugal in FA to make up for the missing draft picks.

It would cost us half as much to move from 42 to 16 as it would to move from 11 to 3. Draft your edge at 11 (there are three with strong value in the 8-15 range--Verse, Turner and Latu). Draft QB4 at 16. Sign Cousins, Hunter and a pass rushing DT in free agency. Use a 4th or FA for a RB.

That gives you Cousins, JJ, Addison, Hock, Darrisaw and O'Neill on offense. Your front seven now has Hunter, Wilkins (FA1), Phillips and Turner (D1). This is a team that would be serious contenders in '24 with a succession plan at QB in place—not to mention $130M in cap space in '25—to keep them there. 

Maybe tweak this a bit to be sure you get a QBOTF you want, and end up with the same result.  You could draft the QB at 11 then trade back up to the 16 range for the blue chipper DL player.

@"supafreak84" said: https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/39485211

Interesting video posted on ESPN today from the McAfee show in which Dan Orlovsky doesn't think there is any way the Vikings can pay both Jefferson and Cousins and the Vikings are probably going to have to move off Cousins, who he thinks will get 40+ million a year on a 3 year deal. Also floated the idea again about the Vikings trading Jefferson to New England to try to move up for a quarterback. 

“That’s wrong by the way… and secondly, I have more intel*. It’s wrong. I’m just telling you it’s wrong. I’m telling you it doesn’t have to be 90.”

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/39485211

Interesting video posted on ESPN today from the McAfee show in which Dan Orlovsky doesn't think there is any way the Vikings can pay both Jefferson and Cousins and the Vikings are probably going to have to move off Cousins, who he thinks will get 40+ million a year on a 3 year deal. Also floated the idea again about the Vikings trading Jefferson to New England to try to move up for a quarterback. 

No, they can't coexist once their cap hits accelerate. I've been saying that for two years. But they can for a couple years. And you're not going to sign Cousins for much more than that anyway. I think what Orlovsky is saying is that you can't sign both to long-term deals. But I think everyone already knows that. 

@"HappyViking" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"medaille" said: I think the ideal off season involves having a good QB and getting like 4 starters out of the draft, meaning guys are dropping and us getting lucky because teams missed them.

 

That’s not hardly a plan though, but something more
tangible:

1. Resign Cousins to a 2 year deal that’s probably something like $60M guaranteed with $20M more in incentives and an out after 1 year if he’s unable to really perform due to the injury, but gives him security if he’s healthy.
2. Resign Hunter to a good contract that you can get out of in like 3 years max.
3. Resign JJ to a contract that doesn’t make me cringe a lot.
4. Resign Davenport to be our 3rd OLB for like $6M prove it deal.
5. Draft a QB with our first or second pick without giving up the farm to get them.  I’m skeptical that we’re going to get one of the top 3 guys, so I just don’t see how it makes sense to invest multiple high picks in getting the 5th best prospect.  I’d rather draft the 5th best prospect 2 years in a row, than invest 3+ picks into the 4th best guy.  If there’s a guy you feel really confident in that fits your system and you’re sure that everyone else is misreading, sure go after that guy, but I think the list of guys that fail after teams traded up for them is probably just as long as guys that succeeded.  This guys probably going to have some flaws and need to sit for a year.  End of the first makes sense to me.
6. Have to get a second impact edge or DL.
7. Have to get a quality RB that can both run and block at a low cost.
8. Have to bring in another competent starting caliber CB.

6-8, Here you are really dependent on
how you get that QB, ie. Did you blow all your draft picks?  You’re probably going to have to pick up a CB
or an Edge in free agency if you draft a QB, unless you get really lucky.  I think if you blow a ton of picks on a QB you're probably building for 2025 rather than 2024, so you're more going for overall roster quality than win now as you'll have to be more frugal in FA to make up for the missing draft picks.

It would cost us half as much to move from 42 to 16 as it would to move from 11 to 3. Draft your edge at 11 (there are three with strong value in the 8-15 range--Verse, Turner and Latu). Draft QB4 at 16. Sign Cousins, Hunter and a pass rushing DT in free agency. Use a 4th or FA for a RB.

That gives you Cousins, JJ, Addison, Hock, Darrisaw and O'Neill on offense. Your front seven now has Hunter, Wilkins (FA1), Phillips and Turner (D1). This is a team that would be serious contenders in '24 with a succession plan at QB in place—not to mention $130M in cap space in '25—to keep them there. 

Maybe tweak this a bit to be sure you get a QBOTF you want, and end up with the same result.  You could draft the QB at 11 then trade back up to the 16 range for the blue chipper DL player.

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/39485211

Interesting video posted on ESPN today from the McAfee show in which Dan Orlovsky doesn't think there is any way the Vikings can pay both Jefferson and Cousins and the Vikings are probably going to have to move off Cousins, who he thinks will get 40+ million a year on a 3 year deal. Also floated the idea again about the Vikings trading Jefferson to New England to try to move up for a quarterback. 

No, they can't coexist once their cap hits accelerate. I've been saying that for two years. But they can for a couple years. And you're not going to sign Cousins for much more than that anyway. I think what Orlovsky is saying is that you can't sign both to long-term deals. But I think everyone already knows that. 

I guess considering Kirk is 36, what's a long term deal? 2 years, 3 years...4? It almost sounds like Kirk won't sign for less than 3 years and under that scenario how much money gets kicked into dead years with our other free agent considerations? To me the Kirk Cousins contract and what the Vikings do is the most interesting story of the NFL offseason. A little over a month away from getting our answer 

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/39485211

Interesting video posted on ESPN today from the McAfee show in which Dan Orlovsky doesn't think there is any way the Vikings can pay both Jefferson and Cousins and the Vikings are probably going to have to move off Cousins, who he thinks will get 40+ million a year on a 3 year deal. Also floated the idea again about the Vikings trading Jefferson to New England to try to move up for a quarterback. 

No, they can't coexist once their cap hits accelerate. I've been saying that for two years. But they can for a couple years. And you're not going to sign Cousins for much more than that anyway. I think what Orlovsky is saying is that you can't sign both to long-term deals. But I think everyone already knows that. 

I guess considering Kirk is 36, what's a long term deal? 2 years, 3 years...4? It almost sounds like Kirk won't sign for less than 3 years and under that scenario how much money gets kicked into dead years with our other free agent considerations? To me the Kirk Cousins contract and what the Vikings do is the most interesting story of the NFL offseason. A little over a month away from getting our answer 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/39485211

Interesting video posted on ESPN today from the McAfee show in which Dan Orlovsky doesn't think there is any way the Vikings can pay both Jefferson and Cousins and the Vikings are probably going to have to move off Cousins, who he thinks will get 40+ million a year on a 3 year deal. Also floated the idea again about the Vikings trading Jefferson to New England to try to move up for a quarterback. 

No, they can't coexist once their cap hits accelerate. I've been saying that for two years. But they can for a couple years. And you're not going to sign Cousins for much more than that anyway. I think what Orlovsky is saying is that you can't sign both to long-term deals. But I think everyone already knows that. 

I guess considering Kirk is 36, what's a long term deal? 2 years, 3 years...4? It almost sounds like Kirk won't sign for less than 3 years and under that scenario how much money gets kicked into dead years with our other free agent considerations? To me the Kirk Cousins contract and what the Vikings do is the most interesting story of the NFL offseason. A little over a month away from getting our answer 

A long-term deal in this case is anything that goes beyond 2 years. JJ's contract, if it's like most contracts, will accelerate in its 3rd year (2026). Kirk would have to be off the books by then. 

I haven't heard anything about Kirk not signing for less than 3 years. I think he likely WANTS 3, while the Vikings likely want 1. So the obvious compromise is 2. We'll see if the can come to an agreement. But it would not surprise me at all to see another team swoop in, not even blinking at 3 years...or even more.