Video: Peter King: Cowboys need to compromise and sign Dak Prescott

[Swagger]

The thing that Dak slobberers don’t understand is that Dak wasn’t the fluke, drafting three All-Pro lineman (2 who made the All-Decade team) in 4 years was the fluke. It’s literally unheard of. Dak was the dink and dunk guy that we plugged in and benefited, and there are plenty of guys that come out every year who can stand in a pocket by themselves and hand off to Zeke.
Having said that, all is not lost because the fact that Dak isn’t signed yet is evidence that somewhere in the dim recesses of the Jones clan’s brains... they realize it too.

Great points yet conveniently forgotten by many. Some people seem to think that outside of the QB we have had the same offense as the Jets or Dolphins in recent years and not the exceptionally favourable QB friendly offense!

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

The Egals lol. I know they didn't get rid of Wentz, but he sure as hell didn't win the Superbowl for them.

You think the majority of the fans care anymore?

He's lost a huge fan base already. Let him go somewhere else. He's been nothing more than a big fat headache.

He hasn’t lost anything. The people who don’t like him never liked him. And frankly, it’s the ignorant part of this fanbase anyway so who cares about them?

 

[OmerV]

If you are fully sold on a QB then you sign him asap. You don't mess about over 18 months worth of negotiation.

Regardless of whether people are for or against the Cowboys signing Prescott, they quite clearly are not fully sold on him otherwise a deal would have been done long ago.

That's nonsense because it assumes a team would pay whatever price a QB wants, no matter how high, and it assumes that there is no need to manage the salary cap, and it assumes that teams completely forget every business principle that put them in a position to own/run an NFL team to begin with.

Do you really think Jerry is a billionaire - or any NFL owner - is a billionaire, by paying whatever it takes to buy what they like, ignoring fundamental principles of business and negotiation? That's an extremely out in left field way to think. Being sold on a player does not require acting stupidly, or believing there is no need to make the best possible deal. That kind of thinking breeds failure in the NFL, and bankruptcy in other businesses.

 

[Swagger]

That's complete nonsense because it assumes a team would pay whatever price a QB wants, no matter how high, and it assumes that there is no need to protect the salary cap, and it assumes that teams completely forget every business principle that put them in a position to own and/or run an NFL team to begin with. Being sold on a player does not require acting stupidly, or believing there is no need to make the best possible deal. That kind of thinking breeds failure in the NFL, and bankruptcy in other businesses.

So you think the Chiefs will negotiate and haggle for so long that they will be forced to slap a tag on Mahomes to prevent him from leaving for free? Or that the Ravens will take so long negotiating that they will be forced to slap a tag on Jackson to prevent him for leaving for free? Obviously not!!! Because they are fully sold on their quarterbacks. They will get those deals done quickly like the Packers and Seahawks did with Rodgers and Wilson respectively. I remember regarding Wilson, didn't he give them some sort of deadline and they quickly caved in!

The last time I can remember a contract taking this long to a supposed franchise QB was Kirk Cousins...and that was because the Commanders were clearly not sold on him and they eventually allowed him to leave.

My point wasn't that the Cowboys would/should just agree to the first offer proposed by Prescott and his team but that a deal would be negotiated quickly if they were fully sold on him. It does not take over a year to propose a revised offer! I used to be a lawyer and now work in legal recruitment. The way it works with the big boy firms is that they do not get involved with horse trades and making countless offers. A law firm will make an offer, a candidate will either accept or propose a counter offer. The law firm will then propose what is effectively a final offer. That's traditionally the way it works, the client does not want to lose face and make 5-6 revised offers...and the candidate still rejects them! It just doesn't work like that in business. So why on earth would it take upwards of 18 months to finalise and agree a deal between the Cowboys and Dak Prescott if the latter was deemed to be such a hot commodity - because the Cowboys are clearly not fully sold on him.

Elliott got paid before Prescott from the same draft class.

Jerry did also say something like, when have you known me to not get one of these deals done. So the suggestion is that Prescott or his team are or least were initially asking for wholly unrealistic money. Traditionally Jerry likes to pay and reward his players.

It's very interesting as to how this will eventually play out especially in the current climate If Prescott has not signed a long term contract before the draft then it makes even more interesting viewing. We have no idea what Mike McCarthy really thinks of this situation or what he thinks of Prescott long term - what he has said in the media is really what any new Head Coach would say, behind closed doors we have no idea.

 

[OmerV]

So you think the Chiefs will negotiate and haggle for so long that they will be forced to slap a tag on Mahomes to prevent him from leaving for free? Or that the Ravens will take so long negotiating that they will be forced to slap a tag on Jackson to prevent him for leaving for free? Obviously not!!! Because they are fully sold on their quarterbacks. They will get those deals done quickly like the Packers and Seahawks did with Rodgers and Wilson respectively. I remember regarding Wilson, didn't he give them some sort of deadline and they quickly caved in!

The last time I can remember a contract taking this long to a supposed franchise QB was Kirk Cousins...and that was because the Commanders were clearly not sold on him and they eventually allowed him to leave.

My point wasn't that the Cowboys would/should just agree to the first offer proposed by Prescott and his team but that a deal would be negotiated quickly if they were fully sold on him. It does not take over a year to propose a revised offer! I work in legal recruitment. The way it works with the big boy firms is that they do not get involved with horse trades and making countless offers. A law firm will make an offer, a candidate will either accept or propose a counter offer. The law firm will then propose what is effectively a final offer. That's traditionally the way it works, they do not want to lose face and make 5-6 revised offers...and the candidate still rejects them! It just doesn't work like that in business. So why on earth would it take upwards of 18 months to finalise and agree a deal between the Cowboys and Dak Prescott if the latter was deemed to be such a hot commodity - because the Cowboys are clearly not fully sold on him.

Elliott got paid before Prescott from the same draft class.

Jerry did also say something like, when have you known me to not get one of these deals done. So the suggestion is that Prescott or his team are or least were initially asking for wholly unrealistic money. Traditionally Jerry likes to pay and reward his players.

It's very interesting as to how this will eventually play out especially in the current climate If Prescott has not signed a long term contract before the draft then it makes even more interesting viewing. We have no idea what Mike McCarthy really thinks of this situation or what he thinks of Prescott long term - what he has said in the media is really what any new Head Coach would say, behind closed doors we have no idea.

Again, let me ask the question I did earlier in this thread (not sure if it was to you). Do you think Jerry and Jimmy weren't sold on Emmitt in 1993 when Emmitt didn't get signed until after 2 regular season games had passed? After all, that's what you're saying - if a negotiation drags out it means the team isn't really sold on the player.

I'm glad Jimmy and Jerry didn't see things as you do.

As for the Chiefs, of course I doubt the negotiation will last this long, but that depends on how both sides handle the negotiation. The reality is, no matter how much the Chiefs like Mahomes, there are terms they wouldn't agree to, and by the same token, no matter how much Mahomes may want to be a Chief, there are terms that he will not accept. Accordingly, a negotiation dragging out doesn't prove that either side isn't sold on the other (and yes, it is a 2 way street instead of solely a team decision as you keep suggesting), it only proves the terms needed to get the deal done have not been agreed on. There can be a variety of reasons for that, but the mere fact that both sides are willing to keep at it for such a long time suggests they both want a solution.

 

[jnday]

It seems like Dallas has been the only one to compromise. Dak and his agent hasn’t given an inch.

 

[OmerV]

It seems like Dallas has been the only one to compromise. Dak and his agent hasn’t given an inch.

You know this how? After all, neither side has discussed the details of the negotiation with the press or public.

 

[Swagger]

Again, let me ask the question I did earlier in this thread (not sure if it was to you). Do you think Jerry and Jimmy weren't sold on Emmitt in 1993 when Emmitt didn't get signed until after 2 regular season games had passed? After all, that's what you're saying - if a negotiation drags out it means the team isn't really sold on the player.

I'm glad Jimmy and Jerry didn't see things as you do.

As for the Chiefs, of course I doubt the negotiation will last this long, but that depends on how both sides handle the negotiation. The reality is, no matter how much the Chiefs like Mahomes, there are terms they wouldn't agree to, and by the same token, no matter how much Mahomes may want to be a Chief, there are terms that he will not accept. Accordingly, a negotiation dragging out doesn't prove that either side isn't sold on the other (and yes, it is a 2 way street instead of solely a team decision as you keep suggesting), it only proves the terms needed to get the deal done have not been agreed on. There can be a variety of reasons for that, but the mere fact that both sides are willing to keep at it for such a long time suggests they both want a solution.

Apologies no I didn't see your earlier post.

I don't know everything about the Emmitt Smith situation so I won't try to pretend and go into detail.

In any event my point relates to the most important position, the Quarterback. How many supposed franchise quarterbacks have been allowed to hit the open market over the last ten years? As previously mentioned, I can only think of Kirk Cousins who the Commanders were not fully sold on and eventually allowed to leave.

I take all of your points and appreciate that there are many variables to finalising a contract. So the issue must be that the Cowboys do not value Prescott as highly as he does himself otherwise a deal woild have already been done. I just can't believe that the issue has always been one year in the duration or a couple of million.

If the Cowboys were completely sold on Prescott then a deal would have been surely done after last season given they had made noises about signing him well beforehand. From memory Wentz wasn't signed until June/July and Goff was in April/May.

A deal will most likely be finalised but one side won't be fully happy with it - most likely Jerry.

 

[Rockport]

“Do the right thing.”

Please Jerry.. Please sign away your teams future because you have a decent QB and if you have a decent QB you have to give them whatever they want because it’s just way to risky to draft a rookie and hope they could be a good QB too.

Stick with the mediocre plan.

 

[cern]

The landscape of nfl contracts has been changing rapidly. The new CBA bodes well for future players. And since dak is not under contract, his demands are changing to keep up with the times. No one is at fault. Just tough negotiations.

 

[CATCH17]

Lol how did I know it would be a Washington or Giants game..

Dak is great when a team provides a ton of space for him to play in.. Its when defenses tighten and actually quality shines through is where Dak goes into a shell and plays not to lose.

If we played Washington and NYG (where the majority of his stats came from) he’d be Patrick Mahomes.

 

[OmerV]

Apologies no I didn't see your earlier post.

I don't know everything about the Emmitt Smith situation so I won't try to pretend and go into detail.

In any event my point relates to the most important position, the Quarterback. How many supposed franchise quarterbacks have been allowed to hit the open market over the last ten years? As previously mentioned, I can only think of Kirk Cousins who the Commanders were not fully sold on and eventually allowed to leave.

I take all of your points and appreciate that there are many variables to finalising a contract. So the issue must be that the Cowboys do not value Prescott as highly as he does himself otherwise a deal woild have already been done. I just can't believe that the issue has always been one year in the duration or a couple of million.

If the Cowboys were completely sold on Prescott then a deal would have been surely done after last season given they had made noises about signing him well beforehand. From memory Wentz wasn't signed until June/July and Goff was in April/May.

A deal will most likely be finalised but one side won't be fully happy with it - most likely Jerry.

And you don't know everything about the Dak situation either. None of us do, me included. Yet you are reaching a conclusion with Dak as if you are applying a blanket standard that provides the only possible explanation for a contract negotiation dragging on, yet in the next breath saying that standard may not apply with Emmitt. It can't be the blanket standard you claim that provides the only possible explanation if you aren't willing to apply it uniformly.

The possibility you are failing to consider is that it could be the Cowboys asking for a bigger concession than Dak will make. You have thus far treated the negotiation as if the decision lies solely with the Cowboys, and the holdup can only be with the team hesitating to pay Dak at a high level, but if, for example, the team wants to lock Dak into an unusually long contract, as has been reported at times, then it would be Dak doing the balking rather than the team. In addition, if that is the case (and admittedly we don't know with any certainty that it is), it doesn't stand to reason that the Cowboys would be pushing for an unusually long term contract with a player they aren't sold on.

 

[CATCH17]

And you don't know everything about the Dak situation either. None of us do, me included. Yet you are reaching a conclusion with Dak as if you are applying a blanket standard that provides the only possible explanation for a contract negotiation dragging on, yet in the next breath saying that standard may not apply with Emmitt. It can't be the blanket standard you claim that provides the only possible explanation if you aren't willing to apply it uniformly.

The possibility you are failing to consider is that it could be the Cowboys asking for a bigger concession than Dak will make. You have thus far treated it as if this is solely a team decision, and the holdup can only be hesitation by the team, but if, for example, the team wants to lock Dak into an unusually long contract, as has been reported at times, then it would be Dak doing the balking rather than the team. In addition, if that is the case (and admittedly we don't know with any certainty that it is), it doesn't stand to reason that the Cowboys would be pushing for an unusually long term contract with a player they aren't sold on.

We know what the problem is.

Dak wants a 4 year 35 million dollar deal so he can renegotiate if the CBA goes up.

Dallas wants a 6 year 35 million a year dollar deal.

If Dak signs for that many years he wants 40 million a year.

 

[Bob-Lillys-War]

Dak's agent expects Jerrah to fold any day now .

 

[OmerV]

We know what the problem is.

Dak wants a 4 year 35 million dollar deal so he can renegotiate if the CBA goes up.

Dallas wants a 6 year 35 million a year dollar deal.

If Dak signs for that many years he wants 40 million a year.

You know this how?

But you might as well tell us everything. How much guaranteed money is each side talking about? How much is the signing bonus? What's the cap hit over the length of the contract?

Face it, we don't know any of these things. There is at least some reason to believe length of contract may be a sticking point, but even if it is, how do we know the dollars being discussed. And realistically, the annual salary doesn't really mean much because it assumes the full salary will be paid. The guaranteed amount is really the key component.

 

[OmerV]

The landscape of nfl contracts has been changing rapidly. The new CBA bodes well for future players. And since dak is not under contract, his demands are changing to keep up with the times. No one is at fault. Just tough negotiations.

Exactly, but it's important for some people to place blame on one side or the other, even though they don't know the specifics of what each side wants. No matter, they assume whatever they want in that regard, and ignore the very real possibility that either side, or even both sides, could be responsible for the hold up.

By the way folks - Russell Wilson signed his new contract, thereby avoiding a possible holdout, on April 16th last year. Today it is April 18th. Accordingly, it's not unheard of for contract negotiations to last well into April.

 

[CATCH17]

You know this how?

But you might as well tell us everything. How much guaranteed money is each side talking about? How much is the signing bonus? What's the cap hit over the length of the contract?

Face it, we don't know any of these things. There is at least some reason to believe length of contract may be a sticking point, but even if it is, how do we know the dollars being discussed. And realistically, the annual salary doesn't really mean much because it assumes the full salary will be paid. The guaranteed amount is really the key component.

Well.. Just because it’s not front page of the Dallas Morning News doesn’t mean you can find the details from those in the know.

If you don’t buy that what I said is the hold up that’s fine too.

 

[atlantacowboy]

If you don’t think drafting a rookie QB is a risky move then you haven’t been following the draft.

So, you'd rather go with the proven failed QB for the foreseeable future than miss in the draft? All you need to know about Mr Prescott was on full display in philly with a playoff birth on the line. He's a stat compiler not a winner.

 

[KJJ]

So, you'd rather go with the proven failed QB for the foreseeable future than miss in the draft? All you need to know about Mr Prescott was on full display in philly with a playoff birth on the line. He's a stat compiler not a winner.

How has Dak failed? You’re making that judgment off one game against Philly last year? How much help did he get in that game? His receivers dropped at least two balls and his top receiver was on the sidelines during the most critical play of the game. You claim he’s not a winner but only 4 QBs in NFL history have won more games their first four seasons than him. If you don’t think he’s a winner then you can’t possibly think Romo was a winner. You don’t think the head coach he was stuck with was part of the reason why we haven’t won more games? I’m not going to continue wasting my time with Dak haters.

 

[KJJ]

He's a stat compiler not a winner.

When he wasn’t putting up big numbers he was criticized for being an unproductive dink and dunk bus driver and now that he is putting up big numbers he’s nothing but a stat compiler. That’s funny! lol