Skip to content

Could Redskins’ Kirk Cousins be ‘better than any other young QB’?

Jun 16, 2016, 12:18 PM EDT


Kirk Cousins has had a good nine-plus months. Since the end of August, when he was named the Redskins starting quarterback, he has set several team records, led his team to a division title, gone viral with his “You like that!” outburst after leading the biggest comeback victory in team history and signed a contract that guarantees him a $19.95 million salary for 2016.

But during that time span did he somehow go from being a backup with an uncertain future do being the best young quarterback in the game? This is what an assistant coach who spoke to Mike Freeman of the Bleacher Report said about it:

“It’s possible we will look back maybe 10 years from now and say Kirk Cousins was better than Andrew Luck or almost any other young quarterback today. Maybe better than Russell Wilson, as well. I would have never thought that a year ago—mainly because I feel like a good quarterback there didn’t have the organizational support. That owner [is not good], but now he seems to be staying out of the way. His coach believes in him, and that offense is perfect for him. He’s got weapons and an improving defense. He may shock a lot of people in the end.”

Freeman said that “other assistant coaches” have told him the same thing.

What should be made clear here is that the assistant coach is projecting. He’s not saying that Cousins is better than Wilson, who has a Super Bowl ring, and Luck, who has led his team to a conference title game, right now. He’s saying that Cousins has the weapons, the coach, and the organization needed to start on a highly successful run that would vault him past Wilson, Luck and, presumable, Derek Carr, Cam Newton, and other quarterbacks under the age of 30.

While I’m skeptical that in 2026 we will look back at the previous decade and view Cousins as the top QB in that time span I can’t rule it out, either. I mean, four years ago if you would have said that Wilson would have multiple Super Bowl appearances and Robert Griffin III would be battling for the job in Cleveland after having been cut loose by the Redskins I would have said you were crazy.

We will see how it all unfolds.

  1. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© - Jun 16, 2016 at 12:26 PM

    “Could” is a big word here. But I’m a hopeful, because I’m a fan.

    This is I agree with entirely:

    “That owner [is not good], but now he seems to be staying out of the way.”

  2. redskins12thman - Jun 16, 2016 at 12:44 PM

    Hope Cousins is signed to a long-term contract soon.

  3. kenlinkins - Jun 16, 2016 at 12:52 PM

    The question with Cousins right now is “What is he”, a one year wonder, a great young QB or something in the middle? IMO that is why the Redskins have not come close to offering the kind of money Cousins is looking for. The Redskins are in a better position than most of us fans understand. Right now the Redskins MUST pay him $19 million in 2016 but that is all the risk the Redskins MUST take. Right now the 2 year avg on Cousins will be $10 million to find out what his worth is, the Redskins could even move that to $14 million per year by tagging him again in 2017. Why would the Redskins add MORE cost and MORE risk by signing him to a 5 year contract with more then $42 million guaranteed before they are 100% sure what he is? So, IMO Cousins would have to drop his asking price to below $14 million a year before the Redskins see any benefit (i.e. reduced risk) in signing him long term, and that is not going to happen. Cousins will pick up one or maybe 2 years of great money, but he is going to have to prove he is worth this year (and maybe next) before the Redskins sign him long term. The math just works against him with his unknown value and fixed cost over the next two years. There is no risk major risk to the Redskins for waiting and being sure.

    • Trey Gregory - Jun 16, 2016 at 2:07 PM

      Where are you getting these numbers from? Maybe I’m not understanding what you’re saying but the franchise tag goes up the more you use it. It will cost Washington well over 20 mil to franchise him in 2017. So just two franchise tags would cost the team over 40 mil and not buy any long term stability. They would have to negotiate all over again.

      I also don’t know where you’re getting that Cousins needs to lower his price to $14 mil. That’s not even remotely realistic. Washington has already offered him more than that. Bradford just signed a deal for $17.5 a year and 22 mil guaranteed. Bradford has a losing NFL record and never had a season like Cousins did last year. Why would Cousins sign a contract significantly lower than the franchise tag or what another team would offer him? He could just Osweiler us. Speaking of which, Osweiler signed a contract averaging $18 mil with 37mil guaranteed. He’s only started 6 games and, again, didn’t play as well as Cousins.

      The price for a starting QB in this league is not $14 mil in 2016 guys. It’s just not. Some of you really need to get over that. The contract talks with Cousins start around $20 mil. And we’re just going to pay more if we wait and he plays well.

      And I get the one year wonder thing. I really do. But eventually teams have to take risk to retain talent. Just like we did with Norman, who has also only been a one year wonder so far. People want to compare Cousins to Foles but 1) Foles didn’t play as well as Cousins did 2) Foles did it in a very specific Chip Kelly system that was new and 3) Cousins has always looked good he just had a turnover problem. But he proved last year that he could grow out of that.

      And so what if we sign Cousins to a $20 mil contract and he comes back down to earth a bit? Say he plays somewhere between like what he did 2015 week 1 and week 16. That’s still good enough to get this team through a rebuild and add some stability. I would rather overpay and have stability and continuity while we build a positive culture, stockpile talent, and look for the QB of the future rather than save the money, go through a QB carrousel, over draft young QBs, start them too soon, and have a bunch of 3 win seasons. You guys act like it’s easy to find even average starting QBs in this league.

      A long term deal with Cousins allows us to develop the guy of the future, the proper way, if Cousins isn’t the guy. That’s worth the money.

      • reedo3000 - Jun 16, 2016 at 3:11 PM

        I believe he was incorporating his 2015 salary into those 2 and 3 year numbers, which I suppose makes sense for his argument. He is saying that we got to find out what Kirk Cousins was as a starting QB in 2015 and 2016 over 2 years for only about 10 mill a year. If we then add the ~24 million in 2017 to the 20 million from 2016 and the 660K he made in 2015 we are only paying him 15 million over 3 years to really get a good idea of what he is as a starting QB. I get it, but when it comes down to brass tacks, if we franchise him again he will be taking up 24 million in 2017 which would be the highest QB salary by about 1.5 million in 2016.

        • Trey Gregory - Jun 16, 2016 at 3:18 PM

          That makes a lot more sense. Figured I was missing something. Makes sense too. But it doesn’t take the future into account. Cousins’ price will only go up as we wait.

          The $14 mil a year thing is still completely unrealistic though.

        • kenlinkins - Jun 16, 2016 at 4:09 PM

          Trey, you are correct, I am not looking at the future, the culture or even stability.) I am only looking at the Risk vs Dollars. The whole debate is centered on “What is Cousins worth” IMO Too many Redskins fans think Cousins holds all the cards and I disagree. I was making the case that if the Redskins GM is not 100% sure that Cousins is a Top 5 QB or soon will be he doesn’t have to take that gamble of a long term contract now. The worst case is that Cousins fails in 2016 and the Redskins have McCoy and Sudfeld on the roster, but they would also have still have all the Cap Space for purchasing a FA QB or drafting one high). Right now the Redskins have Cousins for 2016 for a 2 year avg of $10 million and can have him for 2017 with a 3 year avg of about $14 million. If Cousins takes the Redskins to the play-offs 3 year in a row at the avg price of $14 million a year you would have to love that. At some point the Redskins have to make up their minds on Cousins but they are in no way painted into a corner right now. They can play “chicken” with Cousins agent until 2018 and still be in good shape.

        • Trey Gregory - Jun 16, 2016 at 5:13 PM

          I understand what you’re saying bud (Now. I didn’t fully at first). But I don’t think the team is painted in a corner the way you’re saying. Most fans I know aren’t thinking like that. The point is that quality QBs are hard to find. Who said anything about top 5? In the QB market pay is not directly related to how good they are. It’s related to options. That’s why guys like Jay Cutler and Joe Flacco got such big contracts.

          So the Redskins play chicken with Cousins and he bails out to another team when they don’t want to pay him what he wants next year. You think saving a little money is worth that risk? That’s a much bigger risk than paying Cousins and seeing what happens. Colt McCoy is not a starting or franchise QB. Sudfield most likely isn’t. And cap space doesn’t help in the draft. People making your argument have to assume it’s easily possible to find another QB as good or better than Cousins. Look at the past couple year’s QB free agent market. You want to enter that? Look at the success of drafting QBs. It’s a huge risk. Redakins fan should know that better than anyone (RG3).

          I could rant about this forever. I’ll just say I think it’s significantly more risky not to sign Cousins than to sign him. It’s more risky to let a stable QB presence go than to tie up some money for a couple years in a guy who may just be average. I refer you to the end of my first reply to you for more reasons as to why.

        • kenlinkins - Jun 16, 2016 at 7:34 PM

          Trey, you make some good points in general terms about QB’s in the NFL, but the Cousins / Redskins position IMO is very rare as it is not often that a team drafts 2 QB’s in the same year and let’s the higher drafted one go and keeps the lower drafted one who showed he could be the real deal over a short time frame. My main point is that the Redskins have time and a fixed cost over the next two years to find out “What Cousins is” and the avg cost over 2 or 3 years is not a killer. The bottom line is the sooner the Redskins sign Cousins the more risk they assume (i.e. less time to evaluate him) which in my mind trumps everything.

        • Trey Gregory - Jun 17, 2016 at 3:01 AM

          I got you man. We just disagree. But I respect your point. I just see quarterbacks as such an import at commodity that teams have to take risk to get them. In my mind there’s either teams with a franchise QB or teams without one. Those teams with generally have winning seasons and go to the playoffs year after year. Teams without go years searching while signing bad vets, over drafting prospects, losing games, creating a losing culture, having massive coaching and front office turnover, and starting promising prospects before they’re ready.

          Just look at the risk these teams assume to try and find their franchise QB. Trading away tons of draft picks (Philly, Rams, Washington, etc. etc.,) or giving guys huge chunks of money before they actually accomplish or prove anything (Osweiler, Bradford, Jay Cutler, etc., etc.) Even a guy like Kap: he had li half a great season (keep in mind that Alex Smith was undefeated with that SB team) then a pretty good next season, but not great, and he got a big deal at the time. Even Joe Flacco: he won the SuperBowl, and that counts for a lot, but his performances ebb and flow like crazy.

          Anyway, my point is that it’s hard to find the guy. Someone like Russel Wilson is extremely rare. You don’t always get to draft a guy, watch him play great on huge stages, and then sign him. Even drafting a QB in the first round is a big risk. A blown first round pick sets the franchise back a couple years. Unless they happen to hit on multiple later round guys; which is also rare.

          I see giving Cousins $20mil a year as less of a risk. I believe he’s already proven he can be at least average. At least a stopgap, but maybe more. Even a below average starting QB gets around $10-$15 mil in this QB starved market. So we would be slightly overpaying for stability. I guess I’m also saying it’s a risk either way. But I would rather make sure we don’t let a potential franchise QB walk over saving a relatively small amount of cap space. If you disagree with that then we just disagree.

          To your point about drafting two guys in the same class: that specific situation may be rare but signing a guy before you really know isn’t all that rare. Plenty of teams have two QBs and are forced to make a choice (maybe Rivers and Breese is a good example). Plenty of teams also have backups on the bench who they’re forced to make a decision in before they really know (like Osweiler). But more common are teams who sign a free agent without knowing if he will work (maybe Matt Flynn, or Josh McCown are good examples). But there’s always risk. It’s more rare for teams to be sure before they make an investment (that includes high round draft picks) than to know. There’s no way to go about this without assuming some sort of risk. Gambling that Cousins won’t walk is a risk. I guess we’ll find out what happens soon enough.

    • John - Jun 16, 2016 at 11:10 PM

      The Skins are stuck between a rock and a hard place. 1) In a contract year, Cousins, on a team without much of a running game or defense took a team that won 3, 4 games in 2014 to a division title/playoffs and in the process broke several team records and led the league in completion %.

      2) Starting QBs get paid big bucks, plain and simple. Consider what the top QBs are being paid and the tag he signed. They will have to pay him somewhere in that ballpark, regardless. There are a couple of factors driving this. You say the Skins should wait and see. Houston only had to see 7 games out of Brock Osweiler and gave him big bucks. Sam Bradford, injured every year except this past season, but he also got big bucks. Andrew Luck will also get big bucks. Now ask yourself, do you think the Skins can pay less for Kirk? Another thing, Denver was prepared to sign Cousins had he been available on the other tag.

      3) Most of the top QBs are getting up in age. Brady is the oldest at 39. Behind him are Brees, Rivers, Manning, Big Ben. Peyton Manning hit the wall at 38. In the college ranks, there are not many QBs coming from the next couple of classes, thanks to the pistol/spread. Cousins very much has a strong hand because of those factors.

      If they dick around and lose Cousins its back to the NFL basement. Colt McCoy is not a starter. He was replaced by Brandon Weeden and what has he done? There are not a lot of decent free agent QBs out there.

      4) The team that has reason to play hardball in the QB game is the Jets. Fitzpatrick has had 2 good years, several years apart in an 11 year career. He was only successful because of Chan Bailey and a good supporting cast. He blew games, they should have won and kept them out of the playoffs.

      If they wait and see, its going to cost even more next year, which would bea problem in regards to the cap. They can’t afford to “wait and see”.

  4. troylok - Jun 16, 2016 at 12:58 PM

    They’ve managed to give him a good supporting cast and that will help him be successful. I look at Cousins kind of like a Troy Aikman kind of QB. Aikman was a good QB with average athleticism, but he had a great surrounding cast. When people look back at Aikman, I don’t think they think of him individually so much as they think of him as a piece of the puzzle that fit for that organization. There’s no shame in that and maybe Cousins will rise up to some new heights this season, but right now, that is how I see him.

    • Trey Gregory - Jun 16, 2016 at 1:47 PM

      Oh boy. I’m not trying to be a contrarian but I don’t quite see that. Aikman had a HOF supporting cast but he was very good in his own right. First off, he was huge. Very much built for the position. But he also had poise and threw an accurate ball with a lot of zip.

      I was young during Aikman’s day. I used to share the same sentiment as you. But I went back and watched a bunch of his old games and I would sit there with my jaw dropped. He was way better than I gave him credit for. Watch his haves vs. the 49ers. Yeah he had Irving: but he was throwing at Dion and Eric Davis. Right at them and he was still completing passes.

      And it’s no knock on Cousins to say he’s not Aikman. The guy is a HOF, Super Bowl MVP, QB. I’m not comfortable making that comparison yet. But I also just don’t see the similarities in their game. I would say Luck is more like a Marino/Aikman type than Cousins.

      • troylok - Jun 16, 2016 at 2:59 PM

        Trey, although Aikman had prototypical size for the position, I wouldn’t call him huge. I’d call Rothliesberger huge.

        As for the rest, we can agree to disagree but I don’t recall ever seeing a game where Aikman took it on his shoulders to win the game. I remember Emmitt Smith doing that, but not Aikman.

        • Trey Gregory - Jun 16, 2016 at 3:14 PM

          That’s a fair point about his size. That’s kind of relative. Ben is only an inch taller but I don’t know what Aikman’s playing weight was. I just meant he looked big out there. Or he was built solid. Just like Luck. Broad shoulders that seemed able to handle the physicality well.

          And yeah, it was a different era when RBs shouldered the load more. Doesn’t mean Aikman didn’t have the ability. I think sometimes it’s easy to forget how good some of these players were after their time has passed. But, come one man, he’s a HOF QB. Of course we can agree to disagree about exactly how good he was but you can’t deny that he was very good. One of the best of his era and, relatively speaking, one of the better in NFL history. I’m not ranking him. Just saying overall.

        • John - Jun 19, 2016 at 10:38 PM

          I gotta say Aikman had a pretty dominant team around him. The offense had a great running back and receiver as well as a powerful line an nice role players in Novacek, Harper and Moose.

          The defense was the kicker. They had Casillas, Maryland, Lett and Jennings at DTackle. Jeffcoat, Tolbert and #94 from JMU at end. Woods on at safety, Dieon at corner. Talk about talent. Young and the 49ers and Farve and the Packers would have gone farther had they not had to deal with Dallas’s defense in the 90s.

    • bangkokben - Jun 17, 2016 at 1:13 PM

      I think Aikman is a good comparison as long as Cousins continues to play similarly to last year for seven more years. Aikmen was never flashy — partly because he didn’t have to be — and his strength was his accuracy. Personally, I was shocked when he was a first ballot HOFer. Obviously he was going to be in the HOF but put his career in Arizona and slap a red bird on his helmet instead of that big blue star and history would be different. Even though the game is a 53-man sport, the HOF has come down to Super Bowls and Aikman piloted his team to three victories.

      Here is how Aikmen measured statistically:

      Solid stats. However in a 12 year career, he was only 6 times the NFC Offensive player of the week. Cousins CAN conceivably match that over the course of his career since he already has two.

  5. Trey Gregory - Jun 16, 2016 at 1:40 PM

    I agree with Rich’s sentiments. It’s a little too early to tell. But COULD he be? Absolutely.

    I don’t mean to be disrespectful to Wilson, Cam, or Luck. They’ve earned the right to be considered the best young QBs in the game. But if you watch Cousins at his best, with an unbiased eye, he’s very good. He seems to have all the tools to be a top QB. He’s always shown flashes where you could swear he was the next big thing. His issue has just been consistency.

    But last year he got significantly more consistent. All he needs to do is keep that up and maybe get a little more consistent and he can absolutely be remembered as a very good QB. The crazy thing is that people want to pass judgment on him as is. Some people don’t see that he’s still developing. His 3 years on the bench wasn’t nothing, but it’s not the same as what Luck and Wilson had. Any young player learns the most from actual game reps. I believe Cousins will continue to get better with more reps. Again, it’s all about being consistently better.

  6. sidepull - Jun 16, 2016 at 3:50 PM

    8 will be great.

  7. mightyjester - Jun 16, 2016 at 4:02 PM

    Kirk is looking good. You have to admit though he had what 4 years to develop as a quarterback? Luck, Wilson, Newton these guys were thrown to the wolves right away. Remember Kirk’s games before last season weren’t so hot. I’m glad he’s our qb though. He’s rock solid and he gets fired up. Great Shanahan mold QB.

  8. crazyallives - Jun 16, 2016 at 5:38 PM

    Kirk is a good fit for the system he plays in and has some great weapons. He may end up having better success than some of the other young QBs but does that really make him a better player? Based on ability alone, I think there are some better young QBs. I’m a die hard Skins fan but my second team is the Raiders. Last season I’d watch the Redskins play at 1 and then the Raiders at 4. Watching Cousins and then watching Carr back to back made analyzing the two pretty easy. Cousins was on a better team and the Skins won more games but Carr is a much better thrower of the football. There was one week that it really stood out to me. There was a play in the skins game that week where Cousins was backpedaling, trying to escape pressure and tried to make a throw off his back foot. The ball was short and floated in the air until it was picked off. Later, watching the Raiders game, I saw Carr on a roll out play with a DE hot on his tail. Carr turned his body, and made a throw back across the field, throwing off his back foot. Even though he was running the other direction and then throwing off his back foot, the ball still had enough zip to complete the pass for a first down. Right then I realized just how talented Carr is. Now Cousins may end up having a better career because of coaching, teammates, the system, or the division he plays in, but I don’t know if I could agree with calling Cousins a better QB than Carr. I actually think they are very similar players. Both are smart, athletic, and accurate. Carr has a faster release and a much stronger arm.

    I don’t want to sound like I’m dogging Cousins because I think he’s great. He’s certainly the best QB we’ve had here in a really long time. I’m thrilled that both of my teams having rising stars at QB!

  9. kenlinkins - Jun 16, 2016 at 7:36 PM

    Rich, what are the most productive years for a NFL QB (either by age or years in service) and general terms is fine if there is no place to find the hard data. Thanks.

    • John - Jun 16, 2016 at 10:37 PM

      Regards your earlier comment about teams drafting QBs high and low and sticking with the guy that was drafted lower. Let’s see… hmmm…. yes, it was the Redskins, they drafted Heath Shuler and Gus Ferotte and Heath never panned out and Gus was the guy for a few seasons along with Trent Green.

    • bangkokben - Jun 17, 2016 at 3:48 PM

      Ken, I’m not sure where one could find supporting data readily available but in my mind with the plus ten-year career crowd growth is charted by a steady incline to about 33, 34 or 35 years old where it plateaus for two to three years and then a steep cliff. See Peyton Manning as an example. Here are the age’s some of the recent HOF caliber QBs played at in their final seasons:

      34 Aikmen
      36 Kelly, Fouts
      38 Young, Marino, Warner, Montana, Elway
      39 Manning
      41 Favre
      44 Moon

      And here is the old guard of current NFL starters ages as of today:
      Tom Brady 38.319*
      Drew Brees 37.154
      Carson Palmer 36.173
      Tony Romo 36.057
      Eli Manning 35.156
      Philip Rivers 34.192
      Ben Roethlisbeger 34.107

      * not an actual percentage but the number of days

  10. kenlinkins - Jun 16, 2016 at 8:04 PM

    Here is something I didn’t know. In 2015 Cousins was 15th in INT’s, he was 15th for 20 yard pass’s, He was 12th in TD’s, and 10th in total yards All very nice stats for an avg starting QB, But he was 7th in total Comp and 5th in QB rate (QB with more than 150 Atts). That 5th in the whole NFL in the system used as a over all rating measurement for his position. I had no idea it was that high. That’s ahead of Bree, Newton,and Rogers just to name a few. Yes, it was only one year but again I had no idea.

    • Trey Gregory - Jun 16, 2016 at 8:32 PM

      That’s why we want him signed. He had a great season. Just wasn’t on a great team. And there was obviously first half of the season Cousins and second half of the season Cousins. If you just count his last (I want to say 8-9 games) he was ranked even higher. Some would argue he was the single best QB in the league over the last 6 games. It’s a half a season but, again, some would argue that’s because it was his first year starting. He had to settle in and then he broke out. I also understand the arguments against that mentality.

      I don’t know if it’s realistic to expect him to be as good as he was toward the end of 2015 all the time. But even if he comes down to earth a bit, he would still be plenty good. That’s what I meant when I said someone like Foles, Bradford, and Osweiler never had as good of seasons as Cousins. Not really even close. I think it’s worth the risk of signing him. I find it more risky to mess around and possibly lose him. Or bet against him playing well.

    • bangkokben - Jun 17, 2016 at 3:49 PM

      Cousins also led the league in completion percentage with the 8th best season in that category all time.

      • goback2rfk - Jun 17, 2016 at 10:55 PM

        Thats great and all but his throws are pretty short. His intermediate to long range number are much worse.
        He is a good QB and probably better than a lot of guys but he is no Johnny Unitas.

        • bangkokben - Jun 18, 2016 at 10:09 AM

          Show some facts. You can’t.

  11. zatoichi7 - Jun 16, 2016 at 9:16 PM

    Another coach went on record to say this last year. “I think he’s a guy that can take your team and win a Super Bowl, and that’s the biggest compliment I can give somebody. Does this person have the ability, the ingredients, that if he has the right supporting cast on offense/defense and special teams, can he win you a Super Bowl? And I believe that Kirk Cousins has that ability.”

  12. Ron lewis - Jun 17, 2016 at 2:24 AM

    Kirk is our guy,good coach and Gm they mafe the right choice

    • goback2rfk - Jun 17, 2016 at 10:56 PM

      Doubt it. Rg3 is looking better than ever and I totally expect Rob to show Kirk up week 4.

      • kenlinkins - Jun 18, 2016 at 10:54 AM

        RG# has not even been named the starter yet in Cleveland, so how is he looking better then ever?

      • Trey Gregory - Jun 18, 2016 at 12:31 PM

        I can’t believe this conversation is even happening right now.

      • John - Jun 19, 2016 at 1:44 PM

        Robert will fade out of NFL existence before we know it. He’s all ready stinking it up in practice. Soon to the bench and out of football. Not an NFL QB, period!

  13. deddmunnie - Jun 17, 2016 at 7:47 AM

    There’s a few teams that would outbid us for him right now if they had the opportunity. Lock him up and lets build a consistent winner!

  14. Claudio - Jun 17, 2016 at 9:59 AM

    Give Cousins a Defense like Wilson has had these last four years and we might be thinking of him in the same sense.

    • renhoekk2 - Jun 17, 2016 at 10:35 AM

      Agreed. Having a top 5 defense means getting more possessions and better field position game in and game out. That leads to more wins. Not to mention the running game Wilson has had. The Seahawks have had a top 5 defense and top 5 rushing attack the past three seasons. With that kind of help all you need is a QB who won’t mess it all up.

  15. goback2rfk - Jun 17, 2016 at 10:51 PM

    He is is a decent QB that tops out at Andy Dalton status. Will get you to the playoffs, will make some big throws, but never does anything more than 1st round playoffs.
    As some point in time we have to ask ourselves could Kirks Cousin win a superbowl? And more first inclination is no! However, i am a fan so I am hopeful!

    • John - Jun 19, 2016 at 10:16 PM

      Oh but if we had Robert or started Colt instead, we’d be so much better off. Not! Robert looked lost in a pro style offense and McCoy is adequate as a backup, filling in for a few games if your starter goes down but that’s it.

      Kirk has had 1 good season the 1season where he was the undisputed starter on this team. He broke team records, led the team to a division title and the playoffs. Not to mention without the benefit of a solid running game and a relatively weak defense. Yeah, the playoff game was not his best but where was the defense after the 1st quarter?

      This year it will be his team and they will tailor the offense to his strengths. It takes 3 seasons for a QB to really turn the corner. He has had 1 as a starter. Bits and pieces of 1 as a backup. Now this year he will face tougher defenses than last year,so we’ll see how things go. I can see him being as good as Joe Theisman was for this franchise, which was not to shabby.

    • John - Jun 19, 2016 at 10:20 PM

      Andy Dalton has been on a much better team, yet has not accomplished much. Had Dalton not banged up his hand last season, you might be singing a different tune. That Bengals team was rolling prior to his injury.

    • Trey Gregory - Jun 20, 2016 at 2:57 AM

      Andy Dalton is a damn fine quarterback. People talking trash about him blows my mind. What? He’s not Tom Brady or Aaron Rogers yet? Is that supposed to be bad? We’re talking about some of the best to ever play (maybe too soon to say in Roger’s case but he’s on track). There can only be so many elite QBs and there’s 32 teams. If your standard is to find an elite guy or keep trying then you might be searching for decades.

      Same goes for Cousins. So he’s not elite yet? Doesn’t mean he isn’t good or can’t be. He’s shown a lot of promise and it’s absurdly too early to make statements about if he can or can’t win a SuperBowl.

      The fact of the matter is he’s the best option we have, by far. We might as well ride it out. What’s the alternative? It’s so easy for people to criticize. But seriously: what’s the alternative? You’re not going to find a better prospect in free agency and probably not anytime soon in the draft. People really need to get over it. Archives

Follow Us On Twitter