Case Keenum

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9241
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY
x 1118

Re: Case Keenum

Post by Pondering Her Percy »

VikeFanInEagleLand wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 9:06 pm Look...I really wasn't in favor of the Cousins signing. I saw Cousins then (and even more now) as a loser. Granted, he has a lot of great tools and is capable of lofty stats, but a loser nonetheless. No one can really know what it would have been like to have Keenum for another year or even this year. You can't use his performance in Denver and Washington as proof that he wouldn't have had success here.

Here is what I do know. You can't be a winner if you're afraid to fail. Cousins is terrified of failure. Keenum isn't. Keenum has that same mentality that Farvre had. He didn't care if he threw 4 interceptions in his first 4 possessions. It didn't change the way he played. He didn't change in fear of throwing another one. All he cared about was doing what he had to do to help the team win. Keemun has that same mentality and I like that. No he doesn't have the arm of Favre, or even Cousins, but if he thinks he's going to have to risk taking chances to win the game, he's not afraid to do that. He was in that position in Denver and is also there in Washington. Those two teams wouldn't have won with Peyton Manning or Tom Brady at QB. I'm not comparing Keenum to them. I'm just saying that you can't use his performance on those two teams as some sort of litmus test for how he can perform on a team with talent.

Today's game was the sort of game that I feel Keenum MAY have had a better chance to win than Cousins. Sure, Cousins didn't have any interceptions, and Maybe Keenum would have thrown a couple, but in the end, I think he would have given us a better chance. Again....I'm not saying that he WOULD have, just that I think he would have made it more competitive.

And the argument of that his miracle game against the Saints doesn't mean anything because it was luck doesn't hold water with me. It just doesn't matter how lucky he got. He threw the ball. Diggs caught the ball. I wholeheartedly believe that if you put Cousins in that situation, he doesn't even throw that ball. He probably either tries to dump it off or bounces around until someone strips the ball from his hand. Winners get lucky. Losers don't because they never take the chance of leaving it up to luck.

So, there's no sense whining about it anymore. Cousins is our QB and I root for him, but I will be completely shocked if he will ever orchestrate a game winning drive, or a comeback in any game of importance much less take us to a Super Bowl.
See this is what I don’t get. Why does keenums play in Denver and Washington not count but kirks play in Washington does?? Because you even said, you looked at him coming in as a “loser”. Why? Because he didn’t “win” in Washington? Kirks worst year in Washington will be better than cases this year in Washington. Guys defending Keenum are sitting here saying “well Washington is a bad football team”. Ok? And they weren’t when Kirk was there? But everyone loves bringing up kirks record in Washington. That counts but keenums doesn’t?? How is that fair? It’s just baffling how much Keenum is “protected” by some Vikings fans. No different than how some protect teddy. Sure, 2017 was a fun year but 2017 was also filled with plenty of luck and a legit OC that knew how to balance an offense and keep a defense on their toes. We still don’t have that. We have still yet to replace pat

But disregarding how Keenum played last year and how he was benched this year but often bringing up kirks past there is completely unfair if you ask me. Case Keenum probably ended his time being a starter in this league. Maybe he’ll get lucky like Fitzpatrick and catch on as a stop gap somewhere but for the most part, he’s done.

If ANY team thought case Keenum was good, or if he was actually good, don’t you think he would have had a smidge of success somewhere along the line?? In the last two years he’s gone 6-14, played for 2 different teams and has been benched. That alone should be the end of discussing what life would be like with Keenum on the roster. He showed what kind of QB he truly is. And it’s not a good one. And practically every team in this league believes that.
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
User avatar
halfgiz
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2311
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 11:38 pm
x 117

Re: Case Keenum

Post by halfgiz »

bdillon0820 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 10:50 pm
VikeFanInEagleLand wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 9:06 pm Look...I really wasn't in favor of the Cousins signing. I saw Cousins then (and even more now) as a loser. Granted, he has a lot of great tools and is capable of lofty stats, but a loser nonetheless. No one can really know what it would have been like to have Keenum for another year or even this year. You can't use his performance in Denver and Washington as proof that he wouldn't have had success here.

Here is what I do know. You can't be a winner if you're afraid to fail. Cousins is terrified of failure. Keenum isn't. Keenum has that same mentality that Farvre had. He didn't care if he threw 4 interceptions in his first 4 possessions. It didn't change the way he played. He didn't change in fear of throwing another one. All he cared about was doing what he had to do to help the team win. Keemun has that same mentality and I like that. No he doesn't have the arm of Favre, or even Cousins, but if he thinks he's going to have to risk taking chances to win the game, he's not afraid to do that. He was in that position in Denver and is also there in Washington. Those two teams wouldn't have won with Peyton Manning or Tom Brady at QB. I'm not comparing Keenum to them. I'm just saying that you can't use his performance on those two teams as some sort of litmus test for how he can perform on a team with talent.

Today's game was the sort of game that I feel Keenum MAY have had a better chance to win than Cousins. Sure, Cousins didn't have any interceptions, and Maybe Keenum would have thrown a couple, but in the end, I think he would have given us a better chance. Again....I'm not saying that he WOULD have, just that I think he would have made it more competitive.

And the argument of that his miracle game against the Saints doesn't mean anything because it was luck doesn't hold water with me. It just doesn't matter how lucky he got. He threw the ball. Diggs caught the ball. I wholeheartedly believe that if you put Cousins in that situation, he doesn't even throw that ball. He probably either tries to dump it off or bounces around until someone strips the ball from his hand. Winners get lucky. Losers don't because they never take the chance of leaving it up to luck.

So, there's no sense whining about it anymore. Cousins is our QB and I root for him, but I will be completely shocked if he will ever orchestrate a game winning drive, or a comeback in any game of importance much less take us to a Super Bowl.
No, Case Keenum is a loser too. It doesn't matter how much heart or hustle the guy has. Since he has left, he is 6-14. He is definitely as much of a loser as Cousins is. 2017 was a fluke season with Keenum. Hardly any injuries, Thielen and Diggs were ballin, McKinnon and Murray kept the offense versatile, good playcalling from Shumur. Keenum simply managed the game well, but he was still a loser.
Diagree on hardly any injuries. Cook, Sirles and Eflien is a lot.
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9241
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY
x 1118

Re: Case Keenum

Post by Pondering Her Percy »

halfgiz wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 6:03 am
bdillon0820 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 10:50 pm

No, Case Keenum is a loser too. It doesn't matter how much heart or hustle the guy has. Since he has left, he is 6-14. He is definitely as much of a loser as Cousins is. 2017 was a fluke season with Keenum. Hardly any injuries, Thielen and Diggs were ballin, McKinnon and Murray kept the offense versatile, good playcalling from Shumur. Keenum simply managed the game well, but he was still a loser.
Diagree on hardly any injuries. Cook, Sirles and Eflien is a lot.
Lol Sirles? That’s like saying “well cousins didn’t have Kline the last two weeks”. No less Kline is a better lineman than Sirles.

Elflein at the time? Sure.

Cook? There was a difference then. We had the Murray/McKinnon combo behind him. And pat shurmur knew exactly how to use them. When cook got hurt last year, flip hardly knew how to use Murray. Nor did he know how to use cook.

I said a while back. The biggest difference last year wasn’t the QBs, wasn’t this player or that player, it was Pat Shurmur vs Flip. And I’m starting to think it’s the same now. Pat shurmur vs Stefanski/Kubiak. Because I’m starting to think they are the opposite of Flip and don’t know how to orchestrate a passing offense. Or balance an offense. This season is going to be cousins worst passing year of his career. Something is wrong there and I can tell you it isn’t that cousins somehow became a bad passer.

Flip didn’t adapt to Dalvin cooks strengths last year and it seems like Stefanski and Kubiak aren’t adapting to cousins strengths this year. I feel like if pat shurmur was still here this season would be completely different. Shurmur knew how to adapt to everyone’s strengths. Made Keenum look like an all star and he’s not a good quarterback. Made our OL look 10 times better than it actually was. Made Murray and McKinnon look like a legit tandem. And we played good defense and fairly good ST.

Hell shurmur has Daniel Jones looking like an all star. Loses Barkley and has Gallman looking like an all star. He had a rookie QB in his first game (on the road) go out and beat Tampa. Who isn’t a world beater but they also just put 55 up on the rams on the road and won and beat Carolina on the road. Daniel Jones isn’t THAT good of a QB. If anything id say he’s on par with Keenum. Maybe less?

Bottom line is, shurmur knew how to adapt and adjust. He knew how to play to everyone’s strengths. He’s showing it now in NY and showed it here in 2017. We have yet to find that in either coordinator. The Stefanski/Kubiak combo sounded good but I’m really starting to question it. When they had to go into pass mode, it looked like they didn’t know what they were doing. Like they didn’t practice it.

All I know is, I miss pat shurmur. Terribly
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
bdillon0820
Waterboy
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 9:59 pm

Re: Case Keenum

Post by bdillon0820 »

halfgiz wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 6:03 am
bdillon0820 wrote: Sun Sep 29, 2019 10:50 pm

No, Case Keenum is a loser too. It doesn't matter how much heart or hustle the guy has. Since he has left, he is 6-14. He is definitely as much of a loser as Cousins is. 2017 was a fluke season with Keenum. Hardly any injuries, Thielen and Diggs were ballin, McKinnon and Murray kept the offense versatile, good playcalling from Shumur. Keenum simply managed the game well, but he was still a loser.
Diagree on hardly any injuries. Cook, Sirles and Eflien is a lot.
By lack of injuries, I am talking about the Defense. Also, we had McKinnon and Murray as RBs, so losing Dalvin Cook hurt, but not as bad as it could have been. We had a lot of balance on offense because of those guys. You could throw it to Thielen, Diggs and McKinnon, or you could hand it off to Murray bulldoze and get tough yards or give it to the quick and shifty McKinnon. Either way, I feel like the 2017 team played to their full potential or even overachieved.
YikesVikes
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1615
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:04 am
x 235

Re: Case Keenum

Post by YikesVikes »

I love the argument that Keenums average play on bad teams with 0 weapons means he will play poorly genre with good weapons. Its such a technically flawed argument, its laughable. Especially since get has proven success with the same offensive weapons we have now. Let's ignore what he did HERE and focus on why he couldn't win with backups in Denver and late round Rookies in Washington. Cousin is clearly the answer.
bdillon0820
Waterboy
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 9:59 pm

Re: Case Keenum

Post by bdillon0820 »

YikesVikes wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 9:34 am I love the argument that Keenums average play on bad teams with 0 weapons means he will play poorly genre with good weapons. Its such a technically flawed argument, its laughable. Especially since get has proven success with the same offensive weapons we have now. Let's ignore what he did HERE and focus on why he couldn't win with backups in Denver and late round Rookies in Washington. Cousin is clearly the answer.
He had Demaryius Thomas, Emmanuel Sanders and Philip Lindsey in Denver. I'll give you that he really doesn't have anything in Washington but don't give me the "he didn't have weapons argument" because it's ####. I'm not saying that Kirk doesn't suck, but let's not pretend that Keenum is some stud either. There is a very good reason he's on his 4th team in 4 seasons.
YikesVikes
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1615
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:04 am
x 235

Re: Case Keenum

Post by YikesVikes »

bdillon0820 wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:08 am
YikesVikes wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 9:34 am I love the argument that Keenums average play on bad teams with 0 weapons means he will play poorly genre with good weapons. Its such a technically flawed argument, its laughable. Especially since get has proven success with the same offensive weapons we have now. Let's ignore what he did HERE and focus on why he couldn't win with backups in Denver and late round Rookies in Washington. Cousin is clearly the answer.
He had Demaryius Thomas, Emmanuel Sanders and Philip Lindsey in Denver. I'll give you that he really doesn't have anything in Washington but don't give me the "he didn't have weapons argument" because it's ####. I'm not saying that Kirk doesn't suck, but let's not pretend that Keenum is some stud either. There is a very good reason he's on his 4th team in 4 seasons.
Umm no he didn't. Go back and check the injury report. They traded Thomas, Sanders had an achillies injury and was banged up all season long and PL did not catch well.

My question is simple. How did Keenum play for Minnesota? Better than what we have now right?
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Case Keenum

Post by dead_poet »

Why does it feel like we're arguing over whether to eat a sh*t sandwich or turd popsicle?
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
User avatar
VikingPaul73
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3371
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 5:07 pm
x 141

Re: Case Keenum

Post by VikingPaul73 »

dead_poet wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:40 am Why does it feel like were arguing over whether to eat a sh*t sandwich or turd popsicle?
:rofl:
User avatar
Cliff
Site Admin
Posts: 9805
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pm
Location: Kentucky
x 536

Re: Case Keenum

Post by Cliff »

I think the biggest regret about getting Cousins instead of keeping Keenum at this point is that the team was secure enough to not draft or try to improve the position. They were "set".

Keeping Keenum probably would have meant drafting a QB too. Might have had Lamar Jackson right now.
VikeFanInEagleLand
Transition Player
Posts: 327
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2018 7:31 am
x 107

Re: Case Keenum

Post by VikeFanInEagleLand »

I have or never will use the word "stud" when describing Keenum. The fact that he has bounced around to NFL teams means nothing. That has happened to some QB's throughout the history of football. Some pretty good QB's have played on many teams. Some pretty bad QB's have stayed in the NFL forever. There are lots of NFL owners and coaches that have the same mentality as fans do. They want the guy with the strongest arm, the fastest release, the fastest runner, etc. The fact that some QB's seem to win without all those tools doesn't mean a thing to them. Most of these guys are viewed as temporary stop gaps for teams that need a QB until they get someone that has all the tools that they want to see in a QB. Jeff Garcia was a QB like that. Didn't matter how many games he was winning, or how many pro bowls he was going to go to, they just couldn't wait to move on to someone else with better tools.
StumpHunter
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 646

Re: Case Keenum

Post by StumpHunter »

Cliff wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:12 pm I think the biggest regret about getting Cousins instead of keeping Keenum at this point is that the team was secure enough to not draft or try to improve the position. They were "set".

Keeping Keenum probably would have meant drafting a QB too. Might have had Lamar Jackson right now.
This. It isn't just Kirk versus Case, it is Kirk versus Case, a lot more cap space, and the prospect of improving at QB via the draft.
User avatar
Raptorman
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3403
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:23 pm
Location: Sebastian, FL
x 67

Re: Case Keenum

Post by Raptorman »

StumpHunter wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:17 pm
Cliff wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:12 pm I think the biggest regret about getting Cousins instead of keeping Keenum at this point is that the team was secure enough to not draft or try to improve the position. They were "set".

Keeping Keenum probably would have meant drafting a QB too. Might have had Lamar Jackson right now.
This. It isn't just Kirk versus Case, it is Kirk versus Case, a lot more cap space, and the prospect of improving at QB via the draft.
In order to improve at QB by the draft you really have to lose. Because it's tough to go from 20th to 1-4. And of course if the Vikings do that, and who they pick is a bust, then it will all be the GM's fault. Roughly 50% of all 1st round QB's are busts. Who's going to be the guy? Who do you give 2 1st rounders and a 2nd round for?
Vikings fan since Nov. 6, 1966. Annoying Packer fans since Nov. 7, 1966
StumpHunter
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 646

Re: Case Keenum

Post by StumpHunter »

Raptorman wrote: Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:15 am
StumpHunter wrote: Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:17 pm

This. It isn't just Kirk versus Case, it is Kirk versus Case, a lot more cap space, and the prospect of improving at QB via the draft.
In order to improve at QB by the draft you really have to lose. Because it's tough to go from 20th to 1-4. And of course if the Vikings do that, and who they pick is a bust, then it will all be the GM's fault. Roughly 50% of all 1st round QB's are busts. Who's going to be the guy? Who do you give 2 1st rounders and a 2nd round for?
Jackson was available and while I think he has a short shelf life, it is probably going to be longer than Cousins is with this team.

50% is better than waiting for the next Manning or Brees to get hurt and signing them in FAs.
User avatar
VikingPaul73
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3371
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 5:07 pm
x 141

Re: Case Keenum

Post by VikingPaul73 »

You don’t need the first overall pick to land a QB.
Russel Wilson, Dak Prescott.are just a couple of examples. And you don’t have to draft just one and put all of your eggs in one basket like Rick has always done. Keep several so it isn’t a complete dumpster fire and panic when there is an injury or ineffectiveness. We have Sean Mannion.
Post Reply