Jump to content
ColtJax

Dak is an example of the problem in the NFL

Recommended Posts

Dak is an average QB, in fact in the latest QB ratings he's in the mid 20's. Yet the Cowboys are in a tough spot, they need to re-sign him but he's wanting 30 million per year and might get close to it! If a guy like Dak is worth 30 million what does that say about the top QB's worth? Eventually teams are going to have to just say no, a guy like Dak IMO is replaceable, and for 30 million a year the Cowboys would be better off looking to extend some of their big names that are waiting on a new contract..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were Jerry Jones I would handle Dak like the Washington Football Club handled Kirk Cousins. I would tag him for a couple of years before I committed anything long term to and average NFL QB. I'm sure Jerry will make him the highest paid QB in the game though. Probably why the Cowboys haven't won a Super Bowl since the '90's!

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ColtJax said:

Dak is an average QB, in fact in the latest QB ratings he's in the mid 20's.

 

Cherry picked numbers can be made to say anything.  Nevertheless, he has to be replaced, and it has to be by somebody as good or better.  Can they get 'that guy'?  He led Dallas to the postseason twice in his first three seasons, has a 32–16 regular-season record. Last year he threw for 3,885 yards and 22 touchdowns and completing 67.7% of his passes.

 

I'd say, is he improving?  If so you have to pay him.  I'm not as concerned with the actual #, just the percentage of cap space used.  Which will change each year as cap space increases and contract structure dictates.

 

Quote

Yet the Cowboys are in a tough spot, they need to re-sign him but he's wanting 30 million per year and might get close to it! If a guy like Dak is worth 30 million what does that say about the top QB's worth?

 

More...

 

Quote

Eventually teams are going to have to just say no, a guy like Dak IMO is replaceable, and for 30 million a year the Cowboys would be better off looking to extend some of their big names that are waiting on a new contract..

 

Name the guy, his replacement, and send the recommendation on over to the Jones'.

 

Teams spend years, sometimes decades trying to get a decent, let alone top tier, QB.  You can't let one go until you have his replacement on the roster.

 

Oh, and this...

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/dak-prescott-19089/market-value/

 

Market value, 28.4 mil / year

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Cherry picked numbers can be made to say anything.  Nevertheless, he has to be replaced, and it has to be by somebody as good or better.  Can they get 'that guy'?  He led Dallas to the postseason twice in his first three seasons, has a 32–16 regular-season record. Last year he threw for 3,885 yards and 22 touchdowns and completing 67.7% of his passes.

 

I'd say, is he improving?  If so you have to pay him.  I'm not as concerned with the actual #, just the percentage of cap space used.  Which will change each year as cap space increases and contract structure dictates.

 

 

More...

 

 

Name the guy, his replacement, and send the recommendation on over to the Jones'.

 

Teams spend years, sometimes decades trying to get a decent, let alone top tier, QB.  You can't let one go until you have his replacement on the roster.

 

Oh, and this...

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/dak-prescott-19089/market-value/

 

Market value, 28.4 mil / year

 

Dak is NOT a 30 million a year QB, no way no how. And it's not just a "pay the guy" situation, they have to find the money to pay a lot of big time talent on their roster. Zeek is going to want to get paid, they have their top OT (Tyrone Smith) that needs to get paid, they're best LB (Jaylon Smith)  that needs to get paid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, ColtJax said:

 

Dak is NOT a 30 million a year QB, no way no how. And it's not just a "pay the guy" situation, they have to find the money to pay a lot of big time talent on their roster. Zeek is going to want to get paid, they have their top OT (Tyrone Smith) that needs to get paid, they're best LB (Jaylon Smith)  that needs to get paid.

 

Bet they wish they had a guy who was good with the cap space. Your reasons bring up a good point to those who think Ballard should have spent more on FA signings every year. I'll be glad when we have so much cap space we can sign our whole line for another 4 years. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ColtJax said:

 

Dak is NOT a 30 million a year QB, no way no how. And it's not just a "pay the guy" situation, they have to find the money to pay a lot of big time talent on their roster. Zeek is going to want to get paid, they have their top OT (Tyrone Smith) that needs to get paid, they're best LB (Jaylon Smith)  that needs to get paid.

 

The league is set up to provide competitive balance, by design. The price of drafting high often or very well? There will be cap casualties at some point. Teams also get creative and convert base salary to signing bonus (pro-rated and amortized over remainder of the contract - kicking the can down the road) and the use of the franchise tag on players.  Letting young 'decent' QB's go to FA just doesn't happen.  The Cowboys and Prescott will grind until they reach the best deal and get it done.

 

It sometimes seems fans would let him go, pay their other guys, and hopefully stink (or tank) to hopefully get a QB in the draft as good as the one they parted ways with.  Not making playoffs for years in the interim. 

 

Dak has a 2 to 1 winning record, playoffs twice in three, and and has been paid under 2 million dollars total for those 3 years.  And he costs only 2 million this year. He will 'get paid', either by the Cowboys or a competitor. But he will.

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2019 at 8:50 AM, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

If I were Jerry Jones I would handle Dak like the Washington Football Club handled Kirk Cousins. I would tag him for a couple of years before I committed anything long term to and average NFL QB. I'm sure Jerry will make him the highest paid QB in the game though. Probably why the Cowboys haven't won a Super Bowl since the '90's!

Yes, I agree, the Redskins completely botched the Kirk Cousins ordeal.... paying him top dollar for several years through the franchise tag, but not locking him in long term...  of course, seeing Cousins in MN, the Redskins and Snyder might have made the right call?  Short term production, and they WEREN'T locked in long term.... lol.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were the Cowboys, I would wait till next year to pay Dak and Zeke. It's my policy to wait till a player has 1 year left on his contract to get him a new one. I'm not a fan of extending a player who has 2 years left on his contract. It especially applies here because while Zeke has shown that he without a doubt deserves to get paid, Dak hasn't shown that it's unreasonable to doubt his ability to be 'the man'. People can talk about why Dak is legit, but the fact that there's a reasonable argument to be made that he isn't legit tells everyone that the Cowboys should be wary about making him the highest paid player in football right now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2019 at 8:50 AM, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

If I were Jerry Jones I would handle Dak like the Washington Football Club handled Kirk Cousins. I would tag him for a couple of years before I committed anything long term to and average NFL QB. I'm sure Jerry will make him the highest paid QB in the game though. Probably why the Cowboys haven't won a Super Bowl since the '90's!

 

Tagging him for two years would cost about $60M or so.
So signing him long term would probably cost them another $30M or so for the 3rd year. And that is when most if not all of the guaranteed $$$ would run out.
 If Cousins is worth his deal (nope) Dak is in the ball park.
 Thanks to our GOAT, QB pay is ridiculous. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BigQungus said:

If I were the Cowboys, I would wait till next year to pay Dak and Zeke. It's my policy to wait till a player has 1 year left on his contract to get him a new one. I'm not a fan of extending a player who has 2 years left on his contract. It especially applies here because while Zeke has shown that he without a doubt deserves to get paid, Dak hasn't shown that it's unreasonable to doubt his ability to be 'the man'. People can talk about why Dak is legit, but the fact that there's a reasonable argument to be made that he isn't legit tells everyone that the Cowboys should be wary about making him the highest paid player in football right now. 

Exactly..... and complicating the situation, I'm sure, is Dak feeling he has vastly outperformed his later round rookie contract, and deserving to get paid for performance "retroactively" basically..... trying to recoup value lost, in his eyes....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the guaranteed money that is the big thing. If they give him a 4 year $110 mil. contract with only $60 mil. guaranteed, it is not nearly as bad as we make it out to be. These are the top 4 guaranteed money contracts all of whom are free agents in 2023 or 2024, and it would amount to about $18-21 mil. per year range guaranteed.

 

RW - $107 mil. guaranteed

Matt Ryan - $100 mil. guaranteed

Aaron Rodgers - $98 mil. guaranteed

Matthew Stafford - $92 mil. guaranteed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if i were Jerry Jones i would cut my loses this year and take a chance on that dangerous QB coming out of Oregon in next years draft but that's just me :rock:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dallas almost has no choice to sign him to a big contract unless they want to do what the Redskins did with Cousins and just tag him. They simply can't get a better QB right now so they have to sign him. He is above average and good at times like Cousins, just not in the very good or great category. It's one of those situations where a team gets stuck with what they have but really has to roll with it and put great players around him and hope. Zeke is great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shadow_Creek said:

if i were Jerry Jones i would cut my loses this year and take a chance on that dangerous QB coming out of Oregon in next years draft but that's just me :rock:

 

 How do you do that? Bench Dak, call in Scott Tolzien and give him QB1?

Then send your OC on extended vacay?

 

O.o

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 How do you do that? Bench Dak, call in Scott Tolzien and give him QB1?

Then send your OC on extended vacay?

 

O.o

lol sounds like a good plan to me :sarcasm:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Shadow_Creek said:

if i were Jerry Jones i would cut my loses this year and take a chance on that dangerous QB coming out of Oregon in next years draft but that's just me :rock:

 

You mean the guy who can't even perform well against Pac-12 defenses? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

imo, if I were Jerry Jones, I admit that me and my organization made a mistake keeping Dak and we wish to apologize to our fans for the ordeal. We will endeavor to do better.

 

No? They won't admit to their mistakes? Okay, then insanity it is: Keep doing the same thing expecting a different result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. Dak is a symptom of a much bigger problem in the NFL and football in general. Mediocre QB's get overpaid and subsequently hamper their team's ability to build a winning team in the long-term. But if we go deeper into high school's and colleges, we see that the game is now full of pass-heavy offenses. The problem, is that the QB's in these schools aren't well-developed and play in simplified systems that inflate their stats but don't prepare them to be able to play effectively at the pro level. Some NFL teams clearly don't understand this and invest large sums of capital into these QB's that should never get paid the amount of money they are getting. 

 

The only silver lining could be that the salary cap will continue to increase each year but I'd be interested to see if that is keeping up with the pace of QB salary rate increases as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they want to over pay the guy, so be it. Is he hurting our situation? No, Luck is worth every penny and wont hold out or any of the other dumb stuff guys do. I hope the Cowboys suck forever and JJ deseves it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/24/2019 at 8:15 PM, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 How do you do that? Bench Dak, call in Scott Tolzien and give him QB1?

Then send your OC on extended vacay?

 

O.o

Starting Tolzien will assure Jerry the top pick lmao 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Restored said:

I agree. Dak is a symptom of a much bigger problem in the NFL and football in general. Mediocre QB's get overpaid and subsequently hamper their team's ability to build a winning team in the long-term.

 

Because very few teams have a top tier QB, and finding even decent QB's (good enough to win with) isn't easy.  Many teams have really bad QB's (in comparison) and most of them were round 1 selections!

 

Dak was taken in round 4 because the Cowboys were not able to trade up to get Paxton Lynch! How did thaat work out?  And he cracks the upper half of QB's IMO.  Here's an accuracy graph (all QB's throws, not including 'hits')-

 

dak-prescott-comp-3.png?w=2000&h=1714

 

Dak can make all of the throws and is above the league average in doing so at most every distance. They just keep his jersey clean.

 

Pro Football Reference Approximate Value chart-

 

prescott-av.png

 

I think the Cowboys need a more efficient offense (like Reich with Luck, and Reid with Mahomes) to be really recognized as one of the better QB's.  Dak was supposed to sit a year behind Romo, but Tony's injury propelled Dak into the job right away, and he has done well. (2 pro bowls, 2 playoff appearances in 3 years).

 

With so many teams still in QB purgatory, Cowboys were lucky to go from Tony Romo to Dak Prescott. Not quite as fortunate (IMO) as the Colts going from Manning to Luck, but nobody should lose sight of the fact.

 

Sometimes I think our fans are QB spoiled and feel anyone not named Luck, Mahomes, Brees, Brady, or Rodgers is trash...

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Because very few teams have a top tier QB, and finding even decent QB's (good enough to win with) isn't easy.  Many teams have really bad QB's (in comparison) and most of them were round 1 selections!

 

Dak was taken in round 4 because the Cowboys were not able to trade up to get Paxton Lynch! How did thaat work out?  And he cracks the upper half of QB's IMO.  Here's an accuracy graph (all QB's throws, not including 'hits')-

 

dak-prescott-comp-3.png?w=2000&h=1714

 

Dak can make all of the throws and is above the league average in doing so at most every distance. They just keep his jersey clean.

 

Pro Football Reference Approximate Value chart-

 

prescott-av.png

 

I think the Cowboys need a more efficient offense (like Reich with Luck, and Reid with Mahomes) to be really recognized as one of the better QB's.  Dak was supposed to sit a year behind Romo, but Tony's injury propelled Dak into the job right away, and he has done well. (2 pro bowls, 2 playoff appearances in 3 years).

 

With so many teams still in QB purgatory, Cowboys were lucky to go from Tony Romo to Dak Prescott. Not quite as fortunate (IMO) as the Colts going from Manning to Luck, but nobody should lose sight of the fact.

 

Sometimes I think our fans are QB spoiled and feel anyone not named Luck, Mahomes, Brees, Brady, or Rodgers is trash...

 

My point is that QB's like Dak, whom still are not at the levels of Luck, Mahomes, Brees etc., are getting paid like they are in the upper echelon of the league. This in turn inhibits a team's ability to build around them with so much capital being tied up in one player.

 

This type of capital spend works for teams that have QB's that are good enough to make up for the limitations that their salaries cause. But to your point, mid-tier quarterbacks like Dak need a strong supporting cast around them to be successful but their overly inflated salaries make it difficult for teams to do so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is nothing new in the NFL, it has been going on for decades and decades, only the money has  grown more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/1/2019 at 9:03 PM, HectorRoberts said:

At one point luck was the highest paid qb. is he even in the top 10 anymore?

 

He's #10 for right now. Dak will likely come in somewhere above Luck, pushing him out of the top ten.

 

Carson Wentz and Jared Goff most likely get new deals next year, pushing Luck further down the list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/27/2019 at 9:11 AM, Restored said:

My point is that QB's like Dak, whom still are not at the levels of Luck, Mahomes, Brees etc., are getting paid like they are in the upper echelon of the league. This in turn inhibits a team's ability to build around them with so much capital being tied up in one player.

 

It's called "Market Value".  for the QB position, it's often not 'just' tied to 'talent, or numbers'.  You'll see, with the points below.

 

On 6/2/2019 at 12:03 AM, HectorRoberts said:

At one point luck was the highest paid qb. is he even in the top 10 anymore?

 

On 6/3/2019 at 5:19 PM, Superman said:

 

He's #10 for right now. Dak will likely come in somewhere above Luck, pushing him out of the top ten.

 

Carson Wentz and Jared Goff most likely get new deals next year, pushing Luck further down the list.

 

The Eagles just extended Wentz (as Superman mentioned, and pushed Luck out of the top 10) , but a little early.  In the case of a QB, it is almost always easier on the owners pocket book to do it earlier than later.  Wentz, injury riddled QB, got a four-year extension worth $128 million, with $107.9 million of it guaranteed and $66 million guaranteed at signing.   You either pay your QB, or you start over and try with another new one.  Eagles are in, they paid Carson and let Foles go.

 

It's market value!  Considering Wentz was still under contract for 2019 and 2020, his total contract is actually a six-year deal worth $154.7 million which would pay him an average annual salary of $25.8 million.  That would make Wentz the 7th-highest paid QB per AAV, behind Matt Ryan’s $30 million, Kirk Cousins’ $28 million, and Jimmy Garoppolo’s $27.5 million. If the Eagles did this next year it would cost them even more. (After Goff and Dak set the new market).

 

The question is not Dak upsetting the market, it is whether the Cowboys want to pay at market and keep him as their QB {2 division titles and beat the Eagles twice last year}, or not and wade back into the "we are Between Troy Aikman and Tony Romo" QB swimming pool again...

 

And it is even more possible both Goff and Dak end up with a larger contract than Wentz now, IMO.  The thing I look at is not necessarily total pay of the QB, but guaranteed money, and the cap space percentage used, each year. The cap is unforgiving and all monies are accounted for in the end, but if the % is reasonable, then GM's can still afford stars on the team.

 

I heard Polian say his goals in the cap era was to be able afford and pay up to 10 elite/upper tier guys long term.  (an example he used was Manning, Harrison, James, Wayne, Freeney, Mathis, Glenn, Clark, Saturday, and Brackett).  Yes we can argue maybe he should have let Bracket go and draft/pay a game wrecker DT (Corey Simon was supposed to be that guy when taken in FA, and it was a disaster, souring Polian on all elite FA's thereafter).  But these were all home grown, long term Colts mainstays.  Irsay understood this as well as any owner.  I see Ballard/Irsay going back to that model in a sense, but with Ballard flavoring.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The talk is Mahomes will be in the 40 million and up per year range. At one point teams are going to realize that it doesn't do any good to have that elite QB if they can't afford pieces around them. And the QB will start to cry because they can't win without pieces around them. Every player wants to be the highest paid at their position, and every year the bar is raised.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2019 at 8:18 AM, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

I heard Polian say his goals in the cap era was to be able afford and pay up to 10 elite/upper tier guys long term.  (an example he used was Manning, Harrison, James, Wayne, Freeney, Mathis, Glenn, Clark, Saturday, and Brackett).  Yes we can argue maybe he should have let Bracket go and draft/pay a game wrecker DT (Corey Simon was supposed to be that guy when taken in FA, and it was a disaster, souring Polian on all elite FA's thereafter).  But these were all home grown, long term Colts mainstays.  Irsay understood this as well as any owner.  I see Ballard/Irsay going back to that model in a sense, but with Ballard flavoring.

 

 

Out of that list, James was let go and Brackett was paid. Bob Sanders got paid handsomely for a few games that he averaged every year. Made no sense to let David Thornton go and pay Brackett, IMO, maybe Polian got his LB contract re-signing one LB too late. :default_20smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2019 at 8:18 AM, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

It's called "Market Value".  for the QB position, it's often not 'just' tied to 'talent, or numbers'.  You'll see, with the points below.

 

 

 

The Eagles just extended Wentz (as Superman mentioned, and pushed Luck out of the top 10) , but a little early.  In the case of a QB, it is almost always easier on the owners pocket book to do it earlier than later.  Wentz, injury riddled QB, got a four-year extension worth $128 million, with $107.9 million of it guaranteed and $66 million guaranteed at signing.   You either pay your QB, or you start over and try with another new one.  Eagles are in, they paid Carson and let Foles go.

 

It's market value!  Considering Wentz was still under contract for 2019 and 2020, his total contract is actually a six-year deal worth $154.7 million which would pay him an average annual salary of $25.8 million.  That would make Wentz the 7th-highest paid QB per AAV, behind Matt Ryan’s $30 million, Kirk Cousins’ $28 million, and Jimmy Garoppolo’s $27.5 million. If the Eagles did this next year it would cost them even more. (After Goff and Dak set the new market).

 

The question is not Dak upsetting the market, it is whether the Cowboys want to pay at market and keep him as their QB {2 division titles and beat the Eagles twice last year}, or not and wade back into the "we are Between Troy Aikman and Tony Romo" QB swimming pool again...

 

And it is even more possible both Goff and Dak end up with a larger contract than Wentz now, IMO.  The thing I look at is not necessarily total pay of the QB, but guaranteed money, and the cap space percentage used, each year. The cap is unforgiving and all monies are accounted for in the end, but if the % is reasonable, then GM's can still afford stars on the team.

 

I heard Polian say his goals in the cap era was to be able afford and pay up to 10 elite/upper tier guys long term.  (an example he used was Manning, Harrison, James, Wayne, Freeney, Mathis, Glenn, Clark, Saturday, and Brackett).  Yes we can argue maybe he should have let Bracket go and draft/pay a game wrecker DT (Corey Simon was supposed to be that guy when taken in FA, and it was a disaster, souring Polian on all elite FA's thereafter).  But these were all home grown, long term Colts mainstays.  Irsay understood this as well as any owner.  I see Ballard/Irsay going back to that model in a sense, but with Ballard flavoring.

 

 

I get that it’s market value for QB’s but my whole point has been that the league has placed too much of premium on that position which has led to QB’s like Dak getting paid more than they really should be based on their performance. The market value for QB’s is extremely overvalued but that’s been a natural progression since the 2000’s. Now, the cap is increasing at rate that teams can likely keep affording to pay these QB’s, but let’s not pretend like every QB that gets paid a relatively high salary actually warrants it. The proof will be in teams like the Cowboys who will pay their QB a huge salary and struggle to put together a team around them, especially when said QB isn’t good enough to cover up the holes on the roster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Restored said:

let’s not pretend like every QB that gets paid a relatively high salary actually warrants it.

 

There are high end sports cars that don't actually warrant a $150K price tag. They charge it because people pay it.

 

There is a market inefficiency when it comes to paying above average QBs like they're franchise level players. But the only way to take advantage of that inefficiency is to replace your above average QB. That's not as difficult as it was in the mid 2000s, but it's still much easier said than done, especially in a league that isn't very forgiving of coaching staffs and execs who aren't successful at replacing QBs. So most teams would rather overpay a QB like Dak than try to replace him, knowing there's a significant chance that the replacement doesn't work out.

 

And when you look at the QB numbers and try to figure out a reasonable market value for a guy like Dak, you'll probably come up with something in the $22-25m/year range, right? Let's assume he gets $30m/year. That's about $8m/year above his projected range, represents about 4% of the 2019 salary cap. If you average it out over the next five years or so, it's about 2-3% of the projected cap.

 

So a team would have to commit to trying to exploit a market inefficiency by relying on an unknown replacement QB, and at the same time deal with the optics of getting rid of an above average QB rather than paying him, to save 2-3% of their total cap money. I agree that the opportunity exists, but I don't think it's worth it to pursue that opportunity -- if you believe in your above average QB.

 

If it's my team and we believe in our young QB (and Dak is only going into Year 4, it's not like he's a finished product), I'm probably taking the L on the QB contract, recognizing that my margin for error with the rest of the roster is reduced, and focusing on drafting well year after year. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

There are high end sports cars that don't actually warrant a $150K price tag. They charge it because people pay it.

 

There is a market inefficiency when it comes to paying above average QBs like they're franchise level players. But the only way to take advantage of that inefficiency is to replace your above average QB. That's not as difficult as it was in the mid 2000s, but it's still much easier said than done, especially in a league that isn't very forgiving of coaching staffs and execs who aren't successful at replacing QBs. So most teams would rather overpay a QB like Dak than try to replace him, knowing there's a significant chance that the replacement doesn't work out.

 

And when you look at the QB numbers and try to figure out a reasonable market value for a guy like Dak, you'll probably come up with something in the $22-25m/year range, right? Let's assume he gets $30m/year. That's about $8m/year above his projected range, represents about 4% of the 2019 salary cap. If you average it out over the next five years or so, it's about 2-3% of the projected cap.

 

So a team would have to commit to trying to exploit a market inefficiency by relying on an unknown replacement QB, and at the same time deal with the optics of getting rid of an above average QB rather than paying him, to save 2-3% of their total cap money. I agree that the opportunity exists, but I don't think it's worth it to pursue that opportunity -- if you believe in your above average QB.

 

If it's my team and we believe in our young QB (and Dak is only going into Year 4, it's not like he's a finished product), I'm probably taking the L on the QB contract, recognizing that my margin for error with the rest of the roster is reduced, and focusing on drafting well year after year. 

 

I completely get what you’re saying and that’s part of my overall point in that teams will inevitably decide to overpay on a contract for a QB that likely doesn’t warrant it. But because the league is at point where QB’s are overvalued and get paid more than they should, the team does it anyway because the alternative isn’t a guarantee and there’s very little margin for error if they miss.

 

As such, teams like the Cowboys have to be more efficient at drafting than some other teams because the QB they have isn’t good enough to cover up the holes in the roster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Restored said:

As such, teams like the Cowboys have to be more efficient at drafting than some other teams because the QB they have isn’t good enough to cover up the holes in the roster.

 

I agree, assuming Dak is tapped out and won't get any better. But that's a premature determination at this point, IMO. It's conceivable that Dak will get better. It's also possible that problem is Jason Garrett, not Dak.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I agree, assuming Dak is tapped out and won't get any better. But that's a premature determination at this point, IMO. It's conceivable that Dak will get better. It's also possible that problem is Jason Garrett, not Dak.

 

Maybe he could, maybe he won’t. And sure, it could be Jason Garrett (which I’m more apt to believe at this point) but regardless of the root cause, Dak still is the one who gets ultimately judged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

Out of that list, James was let go and Brackett was paid. Bob Sanders got paid handsomely for a few games that he averaged every year. Made no sense to let David Thornton go and pay Brackett, IMO, maybe Polian got his LB contract re-signing one LB too late. :default_20smile:

 

Letting Thornton get out of the building and paying for Corey Simon to come into the building are very high, if not tops, on Polian's regret list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Letting Thornton get out of the building and paying for Corey Simon to come into the building are very high, if not tops, on Polian's regret list.

 

Jake Scott leaving and trading up for Tony Ugoh led to the rapid deterioration of the OL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2019 at 8:05 PM, Superman said:

 

Jake Scott leaving and trading up for Tony Ugoh led to the rapid deterioration of the OL. 

 

Sure, but Polian didn't regret it right away (like the Thornton issue, etc...) who still felt he had a decent line...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2019 at 8:06 AM, ColtJax said:

Dak is an average QB, in fact in the latest QB ratings he's in the mid 20's. Yet the Cowboys are in a tough spot, they need to re-sign him but he's wanting 30 million per year and might get close to it! If a guy like Dak is worth 30 million what does that say about the top QB's worth? Eventually teams are going to have to just say no, a guy like Dak IMO is replaceable, and for 30 million a year the Cowboys would be better off looking to extend some of their big names that are waiting on a new contract..

I agree and the reason he’ll get it is it’s harder than hell to find a QB even as good as Dak. I also agree that these QB contract are getting out control. I mean  Lucks contract will be up in a few years what will he get crazy. They will have to keep increasing the salary cap to compensate for it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, superrep1967 said:

I agree and the reason he’ll get it is it’s harder than hell to find a QB even as good as Dak. I also agree that these QB contract are getting out control. I mean  Lucks contract will be up in a few years what will he get crazy. They will have to keep increasing the salary cap to compensate for it.

Yep.   Dak is an above average QB.   With where the Cowboys will be drafting, they will be able to draft someone with a chance to be above average while not being able to spend that pick on a position of need.  

Career 66.1% completions.   67 TD's 25 INT's.  96.0 rating.    While not deserving of top money, they would be hard pressed to get that from a draftee or FA signing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • we are in a division that likes to run too.   the titans and texans ranked 7th and 8th in rushing yards, while the colts and jaguars were 19th and 20th.  that was down year for the jaguars, the previous year they were top 5
    • People love to prognosticate. My crystal ball broke so I don't have any insight into the future, but Ballard is using particular criteria (data) that has shown to be better predictors than merely guessing. Let's watch to see whether his approach to dealing with the unknown is better than other teams. I think we will be surprised.
    • Remember,  we are not debating whether Spring is doable.   I've stated from the beginning that I agree.    It's not as bad as some here think it is.    It's doable,   No question.   We are debating whether Spring is preferable, or desireable.    So, when you write,  that you don't think you have to say more about an issue,  any issue,  I'm sorry,   but NO!     You DO have to say more.  A heckuva lot more.    Because YOU have the burden of proof.    My position is the Industry Standard.   Your's has, by comparison,  a handful of examples.   Some are recent.   That's great.   But I view that as a nod to the position that it's doable.    You view it as a possibility that it might soon become the norm.   I'm happy to wait until that actually happens.   As to your primary argument.....    that all the prep work has been done,  and if you make the changes in winter,  that the GM is not up to speed on what the current scouts and player personnel people have done.    Except there is this......   Your argument that you yourself use to others here who complain that changing in the spring is bad.   To quote you....   it's just one draft.    One free agency period.    And there will soon be another,  and then another....   and another.   One season is nothing in the grand scheme of things.   That is what you wrote (roughly) to posters who think making the GM change in the spring is outright terrible and stupid.    Which I strongly disagree with their positin.   Your argument makes my argument for me.    I want the new GM in the building ASAP.    So he can sooner evaluate his players.    His front office.    His scouts.    The entire program.   Waiting until May or June just delays that.    I want it to begin ASAP.   I'd expect that he can and would be able to make some level of difference in his first free agency and draft.    Plus,  I think you way, way over-dramatize the handicap the new GM has arriving in January.   He's the GM.    He's already got a ton of information in his head,  and in his notebooks, his binders.    He's not in as much of a bind as you like to portray.     So, with your desired scenario, this draft could be used for a system that the new GM doesn't even want to run.    Like Chuck running a 3-4,  when Ballard wants to run a 4-3.    Like Chuck wanted to run a power running game and a deep pattern passing game.    While Ballard favors a zone running game and a get rid of the ball quick, move the chains offense.     In your preferred scenario,  you're the one who is burning the first year the GM has,  not me.     I see little of the benefits and mostly an approach that screams....   "Gee,  I hope this works out."   By the way,  I didn't want this post to end without addressing one of your main points.   Your paragraph that starts with this:   My Point:  There are always good candidates...   same is true for head coaches and coordinators.    I'm sorry,  but I'm going to STRONGLY disagree with that argument.  And I think you'll retract that.    Every so often you'll see an article about how did the class of GM's from a previous year turn out?   Or head coach hires?    I used to tell posters here who hated Pagano that the class of head coaches that included Chuck,  that all of the other coaches got fired before Chuck.    That Chuck was the best of his class.   And that happens with GM's too.   A class gets hired,  and quite often most of them, sometimes all of them don't work out.   I believe my position has far more facts to back that up.    There isn't always a Sean McVey.  There isn't always a Kyle Shannahan.   There isn't always a Josh McDaniels.   There aren't 32 good GM's, or 32 good head coaches,  or 32 good offensive or defensive coordinators.   That's why so many teams struggle for years to get those spots right.   So, no, I absolutely reject the idea that there are always good candidates.    Sorry.   I know you believe what you're writing.   But honestly, this feels like one big thought experiment. Like you're trying to make a case for something you really don't believe,  but you're trying to see if you can make a good argument anyway.   And yet I know that's NOT the case.    That you really, honestly do believe this.    That's what I find so astonishing.    There's lots of opinion,  and not a lot of evidence to back this up.    As I've said from the get-go....   I think this is doable.    I just don't think it's desireable or preferable.  
    • To your last paragraph....   yes,  I agree that if a GM,  any GM, inherits a bad roster,  then no matter how OK his draft picks may be,   they will likely stick on the roster.   But if you're a GM inheriting a poor team,  and you draft players that are only somewhat better than what you originally had,  then the improvement in the team will only be so good.   Again,  from 4 wis,  to perhaps 6-7.    That wouldn't be bad.    That would be reasonable.   But when you suddenly pop to 10 wins,  including 9 of the last 10 in the regular season,  and you win on the road in the playoffs,   then there's got to be something more there than just the GM's new guys.    Those guys have got to be good.    You can't do that well simply because they're better than the previous guys.    They're much better.    Yes, the coaching staff is better and the systems the team is running are better,  but so are the players.    They have to execute.    And we did.   Better than we thought possible.    Certainly better than when we were 1-5 and looked like a candidate for a top-10 or even a top-5 draft pick.    The players are good.   They may not be great yet,  but they're really good and much better than what we had.    The results are all the proof you need.   Again,  thanks for the exchange....  
  • Members

    • Nadine

      Nadine 7,321

      Administrators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • tdblue17

      tdblue17 3

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Smonroe

      Smonroe 9,354

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • rob220

      rob220 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • aaron11

      aaron11 2,014

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • lincolndefan

      lincolndefan 2

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • brently76

      brently76 17

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jvan1973

      jvan1973 16,053

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • PureLuck

      PureLuck 96

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • LockeDown

      LockeDown 2,083

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...