We can just add void years to Kirk's contract

Ok so we are now here.

2 problems with this.
1st your choice of the word ignorantly. Not necessary.
2nd what if Kirk says. Nah I'm good with the $45 million and FA next year? That was my point in the other thread. What will Kirk do? We are stuck.

We've seen in him from the past no problem playing on year to year deals if the money is right. It doesn't get much righter then what he'll get next year.

Adding void years is the worst of all possible options for the Vikings with Cousins. It makes absolutely no sense at all. Even if you hate Cousins, want him gone and want his 2022 cap hit lower, adding void years would be a terrible move.

Let’s say there is a hypothetical situation this offseason where we know with 100% certainty that Cousins will not be the day 1, 2023 starter, that he is gone for sure after next year. The Vikings would still extend him. That's because a 34 year old QB with 120+ starts an 2.5:1 TD to INT ratio will have value to other teams. If the Vikings know he's not the QB of the future, they will still maintain that trade asset. Throwing assets like that straight in the garbage with void years makes the team worse.

Use the value range of QBs: Bridgewater on a 1 year deal was worth a 5th; Darnold fetched a 2nd + 4th, Wentz a 1st/2nd, Stafford was two 1’s + Goff. Cousins would return more than Bridgewater or Darnold, less than Stafford, so you’re talking about throwing away the approximate equivalence of the Wentz trade of a 1st or 2nd round pick.


Yeah, because Brees was going to retire and there was no situation where he would play for another team. The same is true for Ben Roethlisberger this year. The Vikings want to let Barr walk and a 30 year old LB with a massive contract and arthritic knees has no value, so go ahead and add void years. Cousins is not going to retire. At 34 he'll probably have an entire 3-5 year contract left in him.

Far more likely is that in the 2022 offseason, the Vikings won't have 100% clarity on what the 2023 roster will look like. In that situation it also make no sense to take the position of "You know what we should do, we should give ourselves no options at QB." They could trade him in the 2022 offseason or 2023 offseason (unless they add void years) whenever they figure out a better option.

Let's break down what a realistic extension to save cap would look like for Cousins:


Cousins gets 2 years, 90 million fully guaranteed.  It is what he will demand and will not sign anything less (might even be more).  We then convert 15 million to signing bonus spreading it out over the next 2 years.  

His cap hits going forward:
2022: 30 Million
2023: 52 Million (45 base + 7 million converted signing bonus)
2024: 53 Million (45 base + 8 million converted signing bonus)

Now let's look at what we can do if we convert 20 million to signing bonus and spread it out over the next 2 years:

2022: 25 million 
2023: 10 million converted signing bonus
2024: 10 million converted signing bonus

45 Million in cap spent over the next 3 seasons + more saved in the immediate cap strapped season, versus 135 million and less realistically saved in 2022.  It is a no brainer to me.  


And just to be clear, trading is by far the best move as you stated, but this thread is only about the extension to save cap discussion.

I think its best to just let him play that year out next year, cap will be going way up anyway and we are likely in a transition period with a new coach and possibly GM. Its hard to judge anything right now because we dont know what is going to happen around Kirk. Zim will 100% be gone but Rick is really the unknown. Does he want Kirk anymore? Does the new GM/coach want him? Too many questions to even start to move forward and think about Kirk hes pretty much the least of our worries right now and going to be the last puzzle piece that is decided.

Didnt realize we were in cap trouble like that, but is that not counting the expected huge cap increase? Im sure something will be done with Kirks 45 million and other players. I just meant that he is going to be dealt with last as it depends who our Coach/GM is and there direction they are going in.

My opinion. At the end of the season, we need to choose one of the following two options: a) commit to Kirk being our QB beyond 2022 or b) commit to moving on from Kirk. Adding voidable years doesn't fit with either of these. If we choose "a," then we extend him and convert some of his $35M base salary to signing bonus to lower 2022 cap hit. If we choose "b," then we place him on the trade market realizing that the acquiring team will likely demand that we lower his 2022 $35M guaranteed salary by converting $10M - $15M to signing bonus (which we would immediately eat when he is traded.) The acquiring team would then have a top ten QB on a one year rental at $20M to $25M. That would lower his 2022 cap hit from $45M to $20M - $25M. Voidable years are a dumb idea in most/all scenarios. It's the sign of a team in awful cap hell because they've likely overpaid aging veterans and shiny free agents. Granted, we're likely guilty of both to a moderate degree, but we aren't close to a Lombardi so the future is NOT now.

Adding voidable years does not stop you from trading Kirk. All it does is lower his cap hit this year, which would do the same thing you are arguing for with converting his salary to signing bonus. Make him more tradeable because his base salary is lower.