g00n
Retired Global Mod
- Nov 22, 2007
- 31,183
- 15,694
I think this really distills down to two terms -- "Franchise QB" and "Franchise Player."
If an NFL team sticks with a quarterback for a long time, for good reason, and are making no effort to replace him during that time, they're a Franchise QB. A Franchise Player is, shockingly, a franchise's best player. You can be the Franchise QB without being the Franchise Player.
Dismissing Kirk as something less than a Franchise QB is pretty silly. His numbers are pretty stellar, both teams that let him go very much wanted to keep him. Last year was a perfect storm for him being let go -- that specific injury at that age with the ability to have that draft position in a deep, talented QB class. They made the smart choice, no question. But both teams -- the actual players on the field -- adored that guy, and both would have kept him if the circumstances were even slightly different.
So it has little to do with how many teams you play for. Plenty of truly great QBs have switched teams for various reasons, especially in the Cap/FA Era. It matters that your team wins, but not necessarily that you win it all. Plenty of truly great QBs never won a title or never made it to a title game. Being a Franchise QB is simply having a franchise keep you as their QB unquestionably for a long period of time.
Kirk is a great quarterback. The notion that he's just got a good agent and is only concerned with piling up stats is total nonsense. He's a passionate competitor, very talented at the position, and his class, character, humility, and leadership are exactly what you'd want them to be. He pissed off a lot of fans in DC, for sure. And these hot takes on him being unremarkable are sour grapes.
I know this isn't a popular opinion here, but in this case the definition is evident. Cousins is has clearly been a franchise quarterback for a long time. There's no interpretation required. That's simply what those two words mean when you use them together.
My interpretation stands as-is.