How many of you would take less?

[Ranching]

I'll take the one year at 33 million and call it a career, more than enough for numerous families....all these players are overpaid

It's all relevant. Settle for what you have, most people do. I always wanted better for myself and my family, so I never did.

 

[Ranched]

It's ridiculously funny to me that some keep saying "take less"!!!! Would you settle? Less money for your family? Less money for a career that might be cut short with and injury!

I'm replying for @cowboy_ron Raunchy.
YES! Because, You Can't Fix Stupid.

 

[Ranching]

Sorry but you can't base this on common people when talking about a $33M/year contract with $105M guaranteed not including endorsement deals. Therefore, if winning means Dak takes a few million less then I guess that is what is important to him but if it's just the money he will hold out for the most he can get.

You may consider yourself common, I don't!

 

[ShortRound]

Don’t care much anymore.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

I agree that it’s weird that anyone would think Dak should settle for less when they personally wouldn’t, but it’s not nearly as weird as the Dak-only fans who actively want Dak to make as much as possible to the detriment of the team. This is why Dak slobberers are such an embarrassment.

 

[Hadenough]

It's ridiculously funny to me that some keep saying "take less"!!!! Would you settle? Less money for your family? Less money for a career that might be cut short with and injury! Less money for a team that will cut you as soon as you slip? What the hell?? I get it, salary cap....blah, blah ,blah. I wouldn't settle and I sure as hell don't blame anyone that would.

The problem isnt Dak taking less. Its more that Dak wants top 5 money when he isnt even a top 10 QB. You want be generous than pay Dak about like Kirk Cousins who I believe is a more talented QB than Dak.

 

[Creeper]

I always told my employees they were obligated to get as much as they could from whoever their employer because their families come first. There is nothing wrong with that. Players whose careers last at most a decade should take what they can get. The only thing is, they better play like they are worth it or the fans will make their lives miserable.

 

[CWR]

It's ridiculously funny to me that some keep saying "take less"!!!! Would you settle? Less money for your family? Less money for a career that might be cut short with and injury! Less money for a team that will cut you as soon as you slip? What the hell?? I get it, salary cap....blah, blah ,blah. I wouldn't settle and I sure as hell don't blame anyone that would.

Honestly I would have taken less and signed last off season. Its mind blowing that Dak and his representation allowed him to play last season without a huge chunk of guaranteed money. It was a monumental gamble during a season in which the teams best offensive player was holding out. Credit Dak for not lacking confidence in the least.

 

[CF74]

Just a little but I’d want some input about adding quality FA’s.

 

[Sully]

Sorry but you can't base this on common people when talking about a $33M/year contract with $105M guaranteed not including endorsement deals. Therefore, if winning means Dak takes a few million less then I guess that is what is important to him but if it's just the money he will hold out for the most he can get.

First: Agree with you can NOT compare a person wrestling with multi-millions to a person punching a time clock ( making millions less)
Second: So if I was in "their" boat, YES, I would take less for a variety of reasons:
(1) When you are the QB of the Dallas Cowboys, you will make MILLIONS extra just because of the fact you are with the Cowboys
(2) When you take less, you allow the team to get "better" players. One of the funny stats that get wrapped around QB's necks is
the win/loss record. ((Like it is solely their responsibility of getting wins)) Never see the records of the RT win/loss or the safety
Taking less could allow the team to get better OL protection, which could extend a QB career.

 

[Flamma]

So winning doesn;t mean a team fitting the best players possible under the budget????? Okay, so then let Dak take all he can get and Dallas doesn't re-sogn Amari Cooper and eventually has to cut some of the o-linemen and see how good Dak is with all that money.

I think that's the whole point. I would say 95% of players don't give a damn about that. They want to be payed the most possible regardless of how it affects the team. And I'm being generous saying 5% actually do. Because I think that's too high.

It's the owners responsibility, or GM, to determine what is best for the team. Don't expect the players to do that.

 

[StarBoyz83]

Later in my career ya not on my 1st contract.
That's the name of the game.

I dont have to worry about dak turning into dlaw or jaylon when he gets paid I'm hoping.

 

[garyo1954]

Sure I'd take less. I'm not greedy. I'm in one of the most high profile positions in sports. I got endorsement money, I got a chance for more endorsement money. I'm doing what I love. And all I'm asked to do is get the ball to the playmakers and let them make plays.

I'm not greedy. (Oh, I already said that.)

 

[HellCrowe]

Bingo - the Brady numbers were more like 10 million plus below his market value. Even 5 mil less promises nothing. So many variables it is ridiculous to comment on it.

Dak is one player. You save 5 million from his contract, 3 on another, etc. that’s how it works.

 

[beware_d-ware]

Me personally, I'm actually looking at job offers right now - between a private sector company that's really buttoned-up and demands you be at work at 8AM every day and work some weekends, and a government owned lab that's a true 9 to 5, has a more laid back culture, and is near impossible to get fired from. I've still got to see how the final numbers work out, but me personally, I would gladly take less money to deal with less ****.

But I'm not a pro athlete either. These guys' careers basically span from age 22-30, with an injury that could cut it short at any given time. Jaylon Smith got shoved in the back after a play was over, next thing he knows doctors are telling him he may never walk normally again. Job security is also literally nonexistent for these guys, all you've got is contract guarantees.

So in that extreme short term, extreme high risk kind of environment, I am taking every dime I can when I can get it. It's likely that I'll never see numbers that good again.

Maybe if you are an aging star with $50+M already in the bank, you consider taking below market pay to work with a coach you like or to play for a contender. But Dak's already taken his below market pay for 4 years; he was a top 10 quarterback last year that got paid the same as our punter.

If I'm Dak, I've already done the Cowboys a solid by not holding out in 2019 and tanking their season. If the organization is committed to me, the least they can do now is offer me a fair market deal. I like the Cowboys, I like how they've installed a top 5 OL and a bunch of offensive weapons around me, but I'm not going to take a Bengals-type screwing for 4 or 5 years to stay there either.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

I would do exactly as Dak is doing, having his agent get every penny he has earned and more.

1000% .......he's likely at the peak of his life long financial potential.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Dak has been the most underpaid player in the league the past 4 years. 40 wins while earning a total of less than 1% of the salary cap over that period.

He got paid exactly what his draft spot called for. Just like every other player in that draft and every other player drafted since the rookie wage scale came into affect. It's not Dak's fault. It's not Stephen's fault. That's the way the system is set up.

 

[cowboy_ron]

If it was geographically an area I liked playing which there was no state income tax and has a very reasonable housing market And enjoyed my teammates I DEFINITELY would take less.

 

[Reality]

It's ridiculously funny to me that some keep saying "take less"!!!! Would you settle? Less money for your family? Less money for a career that might be cut short with and injury! Less money for a team that will cut you as soon as you slip? What the hell?? I get it, salary cap....blah, blah ,blah. I wouldn't settle and I sure as hell don't blame anyone that would.

You are quite right, but there are two sides to this.

The player has every right to try to get as much as he can.

His employer on the other hand has the right to say, "that's the best I can/will do" and move on without him if he wants more.

I have said many times that I do not blame players for trying to get as much as they can because they never know when their career will end. It could happen a lot sooner than expected for a variety of reasons.

That said, I also think teams are well within their rights to make their best offer and walk away if they don't want to overpay (in their minds) the player.

For example, let's say you want to buy a hard-to-yet-not-impossible-to-find vehicle ..

What if the dealership says they would only sell you the vehicle at 20% over sticker price?

The car belongs to them, so its within their right to ask whatever they want for it. They could ask double the price if they feel its worth that.

Do you pay them what they want or do you accept they want more than you are willing to spend and move on?

Again, I am not blaming Dak for trying to get the most he can because most people probably would in his situation.

At the same time though, do not blame the team if they are unwilling to pay him what he's asking nor blame the fans who voice their opinions that he is not worth what he is asking.

In the end, if Dak is here, I am good with that. If Dak is gone, I am good with that too. I really do not care which players they keep, release or trade any more because most players are mercenaries now.

All I care about is the end result .. winning a Super Bowl.

 

[JoeKing]

You are quite right, but there are two sides to this.

The player has every right to try to get as much as he can.

His employer on the other hand has the right to say, "that's the best I can/will do" and move on without him if he wants more.

I have said many times that I do not blame players for trying to get as much as they can because they never know when their career will end. It could happen a lot sooner than expected for a variety of reasons.

That said, I also think teams are well within their rights to make their best offer and walk away if they don't want to overpay (in their minds) the player.

For example, let's say you want to buy a hard-to-yet-not-impossible-to-find vehicle ..

What if the dealership says they would only sell you the vehicle at 20% over sticker price?

The car belongs to them, so its within their right to ask whatever they want for it. They could ask double the price if they feel its worth that.

Do you pay them what they want or do you accept they want more than you are willing to spend and move on?

Again, I am not blaming Dak for trying to get the most he can because most people probably would in his situation.

At the same time though, do not blame the team if they are unwilling to pay him what he's asking nor blame the fans who voice their opinions that he is not worth what he is asking.

In the end, if Dak is here, I am good with that. If Dak is gone, I am good with that too. I really do not care which players they keep, release or trade any more because most players are mercenaries now.

All I care about is the end result .. winning a Super Bowl.

The problem with that is, in the next 2-3 year window they are not winning a SB without Dak at QB.