Continuation from the Darnold thread

Well, when we've seen as many QB's come and go over the years..........you learn a few things.   Personally, I don't think Tarkenton was as great as people think.  He had a hell of defense when he came back to MN and couldn't win the big one.   

Yet 12/16 team to make the superbowl the last 8 seasons had an offense ranked in the top 5 in terms of PPD. Only one team made the SB without being ranked in the top 10 (Cincinatti at 11 with Burrow/Chase/Higgins/Mixon). Last year when using this measure the Chiefs ranked 10th as well as the only other team with a double digit ranking offensively (yet have Mahomes/Kelce). So in both instances of a teams ranking offensively being double digits they had an elite level QB that has proven an ability to win in the postseason with support while not dropping past 11th.

On the flip side it is actually the defense where you don't see teams ranked as high. There were actually 5/16 teams that made the SB ranked 15th or worse in PPD allowed. Only 4/16 were ranked in the top 5, a drastic difference from offenses where that was clearly the norm.

The overall average ranking of SB defenses was actually just outside of top 10. The offense averaged being ranked just within the top 5. So despite what you are trying to say the game has changed recently compared to the past with the rules making the passing games importance even greater (this is part of why QB/WR salaries are skyrocketing). Offense has become more of a dictating factor on if the team makes it to the SB or not in recent history.



True but another aspect is that even if they sometimes don't win the SB they can still help lead the team to some success and over time repeatedly have success when given the opportunity with good support.

Mahomes won the SB with defenses ranked 15th and 21st in terms of PPD. The Vikings defense as a whole the last 6 years falls right in that range on average (17-18). We even had the first two years with Cousins here and great weapons along with the 4rd and 8th ranked defense while only getting a single playoff win.

So the defenses for the Vikings at times have been good enough to win if we could produce offensively at an elite level. We were never able to sustain that type of offense despite most of the talent being stacked on that side of the ball. People don't solely judge by SB's and all of this type of context is why the real greats are seperated from who you are trying to compare them to. The full body of work is usually telling because it is rare a QB never has any help ever at any point in his career (even Stafford got his shot).




Agreed. That's the best support he has had in his career and he fell apart in the only divisional appearance he has ever had that season. That is actually a part of why it should have been apparent it wouldn't work with him because that was our all in push before we had to let a lot of people leave due to the cap issues. The frustration of no playoff wins despite keeping Cousins and just being mediocre is not his fault, that is on management because everyone should have seen that 2019 season just how much help Cousins was actually going to need to be competative with the best of the best (more than top 10 defense and elite weapons around him).



You need to remember that the game is constantly changing as has been pointed out before. In 1988 and 1989 when San Francisco won the SB back to back, the average points per game was 20.3 and 20.6. There have been 3 seasons Kirk has been here where the average was over 23 ppg and a peak at 24.8 which is a very large difference when comparing these teams to the league at each time.

Over the last 6 seasons the Vikings offense has averaged a ranking of 14.2 in terms of offensive PPD. In just the 5 healthy seasons with Kirk we have averaged 13.4 in terms of PPD. That paints a much clearer picture in relative terms of how our offense stacks up compared to the actual competition at the time and we are much much closer to average than elite.



Nope, it is not. Defense can help a QB look better than he is by putting him in good position to score and win games but whether or not a QB is actually elite comes down to their level of play which will be more subjective. This is no different than elite WR's helping QB's counting stats. Any measure you use to guage an individual player in football will in some ways be reliant on other factors playing in. Mahomes had the least amount of offensive weapons in his entire career and his individual stats took a hit but the team won because the defense provided more support than in the past.

So it isn't just a wins thing, you always need to take the full context into account. Your view tends to leave out a lot of context around how the game has changed and compares things that are not alike. That is why a lot of what you are saying ends up being a broken record that gets tuned out. Nobody is actually saying defense doesn't matter, there are just very obvious issues with ignoring so much context to push these ideas.

It's the same as comparing SB teams and players to our recent teams and Kirk in the OP lol, it's because this is a Vikings board. It's the exact same thing just with a slightly better metric that accounts for pace too to give a better perspective on true efficiency. That you keep harping on PPD instead of actually trying to look at the full context being pointed out is very very telling and exactly why youy get the responses you do (along with the strawman arguments that always come with it)

It is located on the team pages on nfl reference for every year going back to like the late 90's or so I believe (I don't think they tracked as in depth prior).




I have already done this for you with Vikings/Chiefs the last 6 seasons, if you want more you can look into each individual yourself. The average ranking in terms of defensive PPD over the last 6 seasons for the Vikings was 17.2. The average ranking for defensive PPD on the Chiefs was 16.8. They won 2 of their super bowls with defenses ranked 15th and 21st, 3 total. Yet the results are drastically different and offense is the main reason for it. There is no way to deny that elite offensive play can help carry a team, even if the defense is not top 10. Especially given recent history where 5/16 teams that made the SB ranked 15th or worse defensively. 

My guess is Brady has had tons of great defenses and that is part of why he has had so much success. Pointing out that other players have been put in better situations doesn't change the results for Cousins though. The reason Allen hasn't won is likely related to going against a better QB in Mahomes or similar with Burrow. Cousins hasn't had very much success when he had great talent around him. He also hasn't had much success when he didn't have great defensive help. Despite often having great talent surrounding him offensively, he also couldn't lead the offense to be a conistsent top 10 type. All of this matters when comparing these players, especially imo the offensive part. That is far more of an issue for Cousins because as was just shown elite offenses can carry a defense in todays game and we have had good talent around him on that side too. 

See you are already getting into strawman arguments about PPD lol. Using PPD is no different at all than every thread you bring up your stats around points, I JUST PUT IT INTO BETTER CONTEXT. When you repeatedly ignore clear context that points to obvious flaws in your breakdowns then whine like this creating strawman arguments simply over a better statistic... Well that is why you are left running thread to thread to thread saying the same nonsense and being called out for doing so. If you actually want to have a real discussion on this topic you need to respond to the actual context instead of this tiring BS approach. Otherwise nothing will change, you will ignore all the obvious flaws just pointed out, say the same things then resort to strawman arguments all over again. We have all seen it plenty, it's up to you whether you want this to be a real discussion or not...

Correct, just like PPG doesn't do any of that OR account for pace. As I said there is no one end all be all stat out there but this one does provide more context than the basic ppg. PPD isn't even remotely part of my point, it was just what was deflected to because that context laid out largely counters the OP. It's a basic measure that does a slightly better job of adding context than just per game stats, nothing more or less.

We fully agree that there are so many ways everything is connected and that is part of my response as well. You need to try looking at the full picture and getting full context. If someone responds to the PPD data with examples of that team always starting in poor position that is worth looking into for sure. I actually have done this for the Vikings before and we ranked 15.2 on average for starting position over the same 6 year span (so basically average). I like doing deeper dives on these broader ideas when discussing where the game of football is at or comparing teams or QB's etc. because of all the ideas and context that comes up when it is a real discussion. You definitely want the best combination of great offense AND defense as you get at. It's just that in recent history from everything I have been pointing out and seeing the offense has become a bit more of a driving factor for successful teams and making the SB. It used to be the reverse but I think many have noticed the rule changes and way it is played today puts a lot more emphasis on the passing games (hence their salaries). 

I completely agree, it is partially on Kirk but not all on Kirk with how it played out. The Kirk fans/detractors often try and make it out into the extremes but the reality is he is usually ranked in the 11-15 range for a reason (among media, analysts other fans etc.). He is not elite but also not bad at all, he is an above average QB that flashes elite level play at times.  I think 2022 was his best season and funny enough it isn't something you will necessarily find in the stats at all. Football has so many aspects related to the team and you just can't really account for "clutch" play in the broad stats. That is exactly what won us 13 RS games with a bad defense and an offense that struggled for gaps at a time (also not only on Kirk). I agree I don't really see it changing with Darnold next season, he is likely going to perform worse than Kirk did. The defense is slowly building back up but next year is when we should have the space/assets to really fill it out. I do think if Mcarthy hits that we are in a better position moving forward though with a cleared up cap situation and stretch of years without that high QB price tag. 

No, this is an example of you making up an argument that you think would be easier to argue against. Everyone understands that not everything is the fault of the QB. This is just your go to move in every discussion. You have literally been bringing up PPG stats comparing Cousins to Montana. Has that ever meant it means you think everything is all on the QB?

Whether using PPD or not doesn't change the flaws being pointed out in your view as I was saying. PPD has no reason to be a focal point at all, especially when you were using points per game which is basically the same thing just not accounting for pace. The issue is you continually push stats that are completely missing important context/qualifiers. Then when it’s pointed out you jump to the above type of strawman.



No, as my initial post explained a major issue is every time you use statistics you seem to be taking them out of context. When this is pointed out, you just whine about a stat that is providing more context because it was used to expose that your narratives are off base. This has absolutely nothing to do with why people didn't like Cousins. People didn't like him because their view of him is based on actual context not pushing any agenda possible to defend him even if it obviously is doing ridiculous things like relying on comparisons 40 years a part and not taking into consideration how the game has changed or how it compares to current examples instead.

People don't care as much that 4 of our top 10 scoring offenses were under Kirk because 4 of the top 8 scoring years in NFL history came within the last 6 seasons too. The game has changed. It makes a lot more sense to compare what the team has done to the rest of the league like I did. When you do that we see we actually were closer to average as an offense over this 6 year timeframe (average start position, slightly above average scoring results).

The context that you keep ignoring is why so many have a gap between how they view him and you seem to. I have never said people don't blame him, I have asked for a single example of your repeated claim that they put it all on him and think defense had no part in it etc... You have still not provided one. His level of play not matching what we paid or the initial expectations is a bigger reason why he had many wanting to move on earlier than we did.



I have answered this multiple times for you including this very thread. If you don't understand or need more clarification just say so lol. It is on pro football reference on the team pages. If you open up say 2023 Vikings page then look right below the top section (and probably ad) there is a team stats and rankings section. It is on the far right of that table. 

Lol I have already done this game with you and showed you the poll from end of last season. If you still are having trouble check the 4 game thread losses when Cousins played from last season and most of them also do not blame him.

This is very telling though in why you are stuck beating a dead horse thread to thread to thread even when it doesn't apply. You are clearly cherry picking statistics out of context to push an agenda. When that is exposed you jump to strawman arguments, whining over PPD, and pretending the obvious doesn't exist. Here you are pretending everyone on this forum is so stupid that they don't understand basic concepts and have never put the blame on anyone but Cousins during his tenure. That's the level you are willing to go in order to defend Cousins and it is why you got the reaction from others in that Darnold thread. In this very thread myself and another poster both commented how it was not all on Cousins and defense was brought up (I even pointed out a great year for him individually despite bad defense in 22). 

This isn't a scenario where everyone else is off base, this is exactly why people get so sick of Cousins talk. His fans go to such extreme lengths including non stop strawman type claims or ignoring what people have actually said to keep pushing the agenda. Even after it has clearly been shown your narrative misses massive important context. Seeing vikings fans and players repeatedly bashed in this manner just to protect Cousins over and over for years is why so many of the discussions have so much animosity. You aren't even trying to have a real discussion about the data/stats/context. You haven't actually been responding to anything related to the actual initial discussion you started since I responded laying out the stats/context showing yours to be off base. It's not an everyone else issue that you keep doing this...



No lol. Why is it logical to give as much credit to a team that has 3 3 and outs and scores a TD on one play as a team that has a 10 play scoring drive? It took one offense 4 positions to get one TD and only took the other offense one possession. How in the world would it be more logical to judge based on that then per drive where efficiency is each time you get the ball with an opportunity to score (and keep the defense off the field resting the longer it goes)?