
A wall of TVs playing various sports channels dominates a section of the media room at the Vikings' headquarters in Eagan. Upon arrival there around 9:20 Wednesday morning, both ESPN and NFL Network were playing on separate TVs. Both had talking head discussion shows on — and in both cases, they were talking about Kirk Cousins and the Vikings' offense.
Not in a good way, of course.
This was a little more than 12 hours after Cousins had apologized to Adam Thielen on a podcast, which was a couple days after Thielen had expressed frustration (in general terms, he later said) about the Vikings' passing offense in a 16-6 loss to the Bears.
And Wednesday marked two weeks since Cousins had said this a few days after a disappointing loss at Green Bay: "Believe me, I'm not going to be playing quarterback here much longer if I go out and play the way I did this past Sunday. I understand that, and I've got to go out and play at a much higher level."
Given he arguably played worse against Chicago, and with that quote as a jumping off point, let's examine this question: What exactly would it take for the Vikings to bench Cousins?
It's a popular thing for fans to wonder about, particularly when postgame emotions are running hot.
I don't ponder that question lightly, but I don't think we're necessarily close to a point where the Vikings should consider it — the reason I ultimately decided not to broach the subject with Vikings coach Mike Zimmer on Wednesday.
But maybe weighing all the factors will provide some clarity on just where the Vikings and Cousins are. Here are some of the key ingredients that have led teams to make mid-year quarterback switches in the past (in cases where it was pertinent, I tried to find quarterbacks of similar pedigree and salary to Cousins):