Florio: Dak to skip Cowboys' virtual offseason

CWR

CWR

Well-Known Member
Messages
23,738
Reaction score
34,528
Dak isnt good enough to skip an offseason and not participate in learning a new offense or at least a revamped offense.

This would be a bad decision on his part. His best chance of getting a big contract is to take what is on the table OR sign the franchise, work his butt off and cash in next year.

If he follows through, it will badly effect his play this season and he will take a lesser contract somewhere else.

His only hope is JJ caving.
 

Sevenup3000

Well-Known Member
Messages
874
Reaction score
923
Reid1boys said:
How many STARTING QBs have you seen holdout like this in the NFL? How many starting QBs have you seen tagged? If Jerry offered 50 million per season and Dak still held out, would you still be telling Jerry to "Get it done?" Cousins was tagged.... and he signed it and went about his business because he was smart enough to know his payday was inevitable. Dak is the leader of this team????

I dont care about the fact he was a starting qb playing for relative peanuts because he was a 4th rd pick. The rules are the rules that the players have agreed to. Only more of a reason to draft a QB and put some pressure right back on Dak.
Click to expand...

The Rules are the rules? Okay. Dak is not obligated to sign the franchise tag.
 
TheMarathonContinues

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
75,614
Reaction score
70,040
VACowboy said:
You don't know you're trading to get inferior talent. In fact, whether it's Tua, Herbert or Love, I think most people would agree the guy has more physical talent than Dak. Unproven? Sure, but Dak has't proven he can do squat beyond the regular season either.
Click to expand...
Based on the luck of the draft? Tua, Herbert and Love are more than likely to flop then they are to surpass what Dak has done.

Now they all could be great. They all could end up being the best quarterbacks of all time. I remember the 2012 draft where Luck and RGIII were can't miss prospects. Yet, who saw Russell Wilson 3rd or 4th round pick going on to be the best quarterback of that class?

Its a crap shoot. I'd personally pay the 35 million to have to avoid that mess of praying and hoping I win the lottery and get the right quarterback but I understand some want to take that risk.
John813 said:
Longer deal is better for the team.
Especially with a position that usually has a longer shelf life compared to a running back, and the QB they want to re-sign is in his 20's.
And with the new TV contracts around the corner. The teams best interest is to get 1-2 more years onto that deal.
Click to expand...

Yes that's if Dak is good. But what if he gets worse?
 
aikemirv

aikemirv

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,223
Reaction score
9,721
Contract/Franchise tag signed or not, Dak is the property of the Cowboys unless he wants to sit on his butt fr the next 9 months.

In short - he should be participating - otherwise he hurts the team!
 
John813

John813

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,333
Reaction score
34,222
rocyaice said:
Based on the luck of the draft? Tua, Herbert and Love are more than likely to flop then they are to surpass what Dak has done.

Now they all could be great. They all could end up being the best quarterbacks of all time. I remember the 2012 draft where Luck and RGIII were can't miss prospects. Yet, who saw Russell Wilson 3rd or 4th round pick going on to be the best quarterback of that class?

Its a crap shoot. I'd personally pay the 35 million to have to avoid that mess of praying and hoping I win the lottery and get the right quarterback but I understand some want to take that risk.


Yes that's if Dak is good. But what if he gets worse?
Click to expand...

How many legit starting QB's regress in their 20's?. This isn't a running back who gets whacked 20-30 times a game. Of course he can get Theissmann'd year 2 but the team is screwed if it was a 4 or 5 year deal due to the guaranteed money still remaining. This league with all the rule changes are starting to see QB's last longer and longer as long as they don't take unnecessairy hits (a la Cam and Romo). I've seen nothing from Prescott that he'll suddenly turn into Jamarcus russell either

This isn't a brokeback 33 year old QB we are talking about here.
 
VACowboy

VACowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,983
Reaction score
3,850
rocyaice said:
If Dak gets hurt or sucks....how is a shorter term deal not better for this team?
Click to expand...
Now you're really stretching. By that logic they should sign him to a one-year deal. Hey! That's what's on the table, and Dak still won't sign!

I know you don't really believe the injury argument. Any player can get hurt at any time. A guy blows his knee out in game one and a one-year deal is a waste. You don't offer a guy the biggest contract ever if you're afraid he might suck. To answer your question, a shorter term deal isn't better for the team because with a shorter deal they can't spread the signing bonus out as much, not to mention the fact that they have to go through this contract crap a year earlier.
 
Super_Kazuya

Super_Kazuya

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,074
Reaction score
9,113
rocyaice said:
Man up and learn how to make post without referencing men slobbering over another man. We should not have to be subjective to the type of thoughts that got through your head.
Click to expand...
If your ears are burning, that's on you... you're a sensitive one, aren't you?
 
TheMarathonContinues

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
75,614
Reaction score
70,040
John813 said:
How many legit starting QB's regress in their 20's?. This isn't a running back who gets whacked 20-30 times a game. Of course he can get Theissmann'd year 2 but the team is screwed if it was a 4 or 5 year deal due to the guaranteed money still remaining. This league with all the rule changes are starting to see QB's last longer and longer as long as they don't take unnecessairy hits (a la Cam and Romo). I've seen nothing from Prescott that he'll suddenly turn into Jamarcus russell either

This isn't a brokeback 33 year old QB we are talking about here.
Click to expand...
So what is the difference between giving him a deal at 31 or 32 years old? This one year is going to change the outcome? You are still going to have to pay him regardless.
 
Chocolate Lab

Chocolate Lab

Run-loving Dino
Messages
36,589
Reaction score
9,851
Super_Kazuya said:
You have to remember, Dak slobberers don't care about football, don't know anything about football. All they care about is Dak making as much money as possible. I know why Dak wants to make as much money as he can, but it's still baffling why so many of his minions are desperate for him to get rich.
Click to expand...
Said it before, but there seems to be a cottage industry now of people who care more about players extracting every cent possible from those evil owners than about the sport or the team. I'll never understand that. When I became a huge sports fan as a kid, I never cared about who was making money, players or owners.
 
John813

John813

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,333
Reaction score
34,222
rocyaice said:
So what is the difference between giving him a deal at 31 or 32 years old? This one year is going to change the outcome? You are still going to have to pay him regardless.
Click to expand...

Another year at 2020 rate is cheaper than market rate in 2024.

Depends on where the team is. Who knows, could be in purgatory of 8-8 or going on another "superbowl" run.

You want to lock down talent for as long as possible. Especially at positions where there's a good chance they'll still be in their prime
 
TheMarathonContinues

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
75,614
Reaction score
70,040
VACowboy said:
Now you're really stretching. By that logic they should sign him to a one-year deal. Hey! That's what's on the table, and Dak still won't sign!

I know you don't really believe the injury argument. Any player can get hurt at any time. A guy blows his knee out in game one and a one-year deal is a waste. You don't offer a guy the biggest contract ever if you're afraid he might suck. To answer your question, a shorter term deal isn't better for the team because with a shorter deal they can't spread the signing bonus out as much, not to mention the fact that they have to go through this contract crap a year earlier.
Click to expand...
Exactly. So why is one year a issue? If you have a franchise quarterback.....you sign him. You don't let one year change that. This all makes no sense.
 
Vtwin

Vtwin

Safety third
Messages
8,157
Reaction score
11,105
Idgit said:
Dak’s well within his rights here, and it’s the right business decision.

If it goes down like this, for the second year in a row, it’s going to make it harder for me personally to root for this group of players to win the big one. Zeke’s holdout-in what should have been a contending season-was bad enough. This one, in the first year with a new HC, would be worse. Don’t get me wrong: I’ll still root for the laundry. But it’s more fun when you also really want the players to get the championship because you like them and respect their commitment. When they take actions that affect the outcomes of seasons for their teammates in order to get as much money as possible, it’s harder to respect their commitment to winning.
Click to expand...
I started to really dislike this team halfway through last season. The needle sure as hell isn't moving in the right direction.

First Cowboys team I have ever felt a general dislike for.
 
TheMarathonContinues

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
75,614
Reaction score
70,040
John813 said:
Another year at 2020 rate is cheaper than market rate in 2024.

Depends on where the team is. Who knows, could be in purgatory of 8-8 or going on another "superbowl" run.

You want to lock down talent for as long as possible. Especially at positions where there's a good chance they'll still be in their prime
Click to expand...
So won't Dak be in his prime at 32 just like he would at 31?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top