Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Griddy Griddy Bang Bang's avatar

I agree with the article, but another factor is that Kirk is not and never has been worthy of the expensive contract he was given. Keenum's Vikings numbers were equal to and even better than Kirk's in many ways, so Kirk wasn't an upgrade to taking the next step. Kirk is not on par with his peers that make the same salary as him, so the Vikings didn't just need to keep at least as good of a team as the 2017 team around him to make it to the Super Bowl, they needed a better team to take the next step. But Kirk's contract made that impossible. Finally, Kirk was certainly a downgrade when it came to mobility and improvisation, so Kirk coupled with the Vikings unimproved poor line play (the real reason why the Eagles dominated them) made the team worse, not better. There's also an argument to be made that Kirk had a hand in making the oline worse, by bringing his buddy Compton along to replace Berger.

Expand full comment
TheDude's avatar

A question for all other viewers and Matthew... Let`s say Cleveland (pick 13) offers their first for Kirk (and you know you can get either Teddy or Jameis for 8mm a year as a stop gap). Do you go for it knowing in the short term we lose qb firepower but gain a lot of draft capital and financial freedom?

Expand full comment
12 more comments...

No posts