What Will Happen At Quarterback This Year?

[WillieBeamen]

Dak is playing on the tag


The Dalton deal cemented it

 

[Outlaw Heroes]

This take was predictable.

I don't understand why everyone is struggling so mightily against the notion that signing Dalton altered the team's bargaining positioning with Dak. Without Dalton, the team had no real plan to deal with the possibility of Dak holding out. With him, Dak loses that leverage.

Only a fool would suggest that the team would prefer at this point to head into the season with Dalton under centre instead of Dak. But it's a possibility that Dak and his people now have to respect in negotiations. It lessens the likelihood of a holdout by significantly decreasing the risk to the Cowboys, and significantly increasing the risk to Dak, of such a holdout.

Those claiming that this move wasn't partly done for leverage in the negotiations with Dak are ignoring the changes it created in the parties' respective exposure to risk.

 

[Risen Star]

Other.

Negotiations go south and Jerry trades Prescott's rights for peanuts to some unfortunate team. The Cowboys rip up Dalton's one year deal and sign him to the long term extension offered to Prescott. Pollard becomes Dalton's best friend.

 

[Flamma]

I think Cowboys will come to terms with Dak on a longer term deal. As for Dalton I think Cowboys would have signed a vet backup regardless of Dak contract.

I can't really disagree with you because of the new coaching staff. But when was the last time Dallas signed a veteran QB to play behind Dak? This is new.

 

[Doomsday101]

Not much leverage, lol. Dalton on a 1 year deal. If this was about leverage Cowboys would rescinded the tag, they would have drafted a QB within the 1st 2 rds but you don't do it with a aging QB who coming off 3 years of less than avg play. Dak right now does not have to do jack, he has until July 15th to sign the franchise deal which I believe he will unless they he and the Cowboys come to an agreement before hand.

 

[Doomsday101]

I can't really disagree with you because of the new coaching staff. But when was the last time Dallas signed a veteran QB to play behind Dak? This is new.

Behind Dak we haven't but as you said we have a new staff in place. In past season we saw Romo with Brad Johnson as his backup and of course Aikman had the likes of Kosar, Beurline and Pete. I think McCarthy does value the backup QB spot knowing 1 injury away from a season going down the tubes if you do not have at least adequate backup at that position

 

[DallasEast]

Other.

Negotiations go south and Jerry trades Prescott's rights for peanuts to some unfortunate team. The Cowboys rip up Dalton's one year deal and sign him to the long term extension offered to Prescott. Pollard becomes Dalton's best friend.

I was betting you would not disappoint with an Other option.

 

[The Fonz]

Can the Cowboys trade Dak? or do they have to sign him first to do that?

 

[MarcusRock]

I don't understand why everyone is struggling so mightily against the notion that signing Dalton altered the team's bargaining positioning with Dak. Without Dalton, the team had no real plan to deal with the possibility of Dak holding out. With him, Dak loses that leverage.

Only a fool would suggest that the team would prefer at this point to head into the season with Dalton under centre instead of Dak. But it's a possibility that Dak and his people now have to respect in negotiations. It lessens the likelihood of a holdout by significantly decreasing the risk to the Cowboys, and significantly increasing the risk to Dak, of such a holdout.

Those claiming that this move wasn't partly done for leverage in the negotiations with Dak are ignoring the changes it created in the parties' respective exposure to risk.

I totally get that it affects leverage but only slightly. Whether this was done FOR leverage as you state is the question. We have needed a backup since forever and Dak getting hurt last season certainly had to wake up a few people in the front office. It probably cost us a playoff spot last year. Lamb was a nice lucky consolation prize though. The fact that it maybe improved the FO's leverage is just gravy for them, IMO. Still, this is similar to Zeke in that we could have let him hold out and rolled with Pollard who looked decent in pre-season. Didn't hurt Zeke at all it seems. So the question the front office has to ponder is whether they roll with the guy who's actually gotten them to the playoffs before or roll with 2-12 Dalton under brand new coaches fresh off just missing the playoffs. Much like Zeke, it threatens to derail the season if you go without Dak. They willing to chance that? They weren't last year.

 

[CouchCoach]

This is a veiled attempt to apply leverage to a situation where they possess none. They are among the worst negotiators in the league when it's a star.

What they should do is ask Prescott what his intentions are as far as signing the tag. If he is not sure about signing it, rescind it and say adios to him and see if he can keep those endorsements in place as the replaced Dallas QB.

The Cowboys have just completed the QB's dream with a skill position set as good as any, a very good OL, a power run game, kept the OC that had the #1 O and hired an O HC. There are a lot of QB's that would love to step into this and do not underestimate Dalton, he's shown he can perform when he has the healthy talent around him.

At what point do the Joneses stop being these round heeled negotiators? Prescott's agent hasn't been negotiating the deal, he's been negotiating the negotiators and until they show some balls, this will continue.

If that's me, Prescott declares his intention right now or he's gone. Let's see what another team is willing to pay him. He doesn't get it, the only reason he got that endorsement money was because of where he plays, not how he plays. In this offense, he is replaceable.

 

[Doomsday101]

Can the Cowboys trade Dak? or do they have to sign him first to do that?

Dak is not under contract so no Dallas can't

 

[Hadenough]

I think that Dak will hold out and after Dalton wins the first two games Dak will sign the franchise tag.

 

[Bullflop]

Dak has a change of heart, fires his agent, then gives Stephen a team-friendly deal.
They all kiss and make up, then go on to win the Super Bowl, 35-33, from KC.

 

[CouchCoach]

Can the Cowboys trade Dak? or do they have to sign him first to do that?

He would have to agree to that and sign the tag.

If that's me, he's got the transition tag, not the safe tag. I would want him to shop his services and find out his value. No way it's up there with the top shelf guys. He has an inflated value and view of himself and his talent and all the Joneses do is feed that because ultimately, they're feeding their ego for picking him.

 

[CouchCoach]

I think that Dak will hold out and after Dalton wins the first two games Dak will sign the franchise tag.

They would be stupid enough to still have that in place if Dalton is QB1. They'd better be careful how long that let that tag sit there because they could end up really screwing the pooch.

The stupid damned Joneses can't keep their mouths shut in the media so Prescott's agent still has all of the leverage.

 

[Flamma]

I totally get that it affects leverage but only slightly. Whether this was done FOR leverage as you state is the question. We have needed a backup since forever and Dak getting hurt last season certainly had to wake up a few people in the front office. It probably cost us a playoff spot last year. Lamb was a nice lucky consolation prize though. The fact that it maybe improved the FO's leverage is just gravy for them, IMO. Still, this is similar to Zeke in that we could have let him hold out and rolled with Pollard who looked decent in pre-season. Didn't hurt Zeke at all it seems. So the question the front office has to ponder is whether they roll with the guy who's actually gotten them to the playoffs before or roll with 2-12 Dalton under brand new coaches fresh off just missing the playoffs. Much like Zeke, it threatens to derail the season if you go without Dak. They willing to chance that? They weren't last year.

Dalton to me is like a John Kitna backing up Romo. A solid backup. But Dalton is also an insurance policy in case Dak holds out. He's 32 years old and has had success in the past. A 32 year old QB is not washed up. Give Dalton the weapons and ideal surroundings and he can have success. If I were Prescott I'd play under the tag at the very least. If he holds out he may never get his job back. These aren't the Bengals.

 

[The Fonz]

He would have to agree to that and sign the tag.

If that's me, he's got the transition tag, not the safe tag. I would want him to shop his services and find out his value. No way it's up there with the top shelf guys. He has an inflated value and view of himself and his talent and all the Joneses do is feed that because ultimately, they're feeding their ego for picking him.

As you have said the best for this team is to just let him go and move on with Dalton .I have no doubt that Andy will do better than Dak.

 

[DFWJC]

how so?

Do you really think Dalton was signed as anything other than as a back up QB? You think Dalton is a threat to Dak? Do you believe Bigfoot is out there hiding from being found?

Stepping in here....sure, Dalton was signed to be a backup. But the leverage is a bit different now because Dallas is no longer totally screwed if Dak holds out for awhile.

 

[JoeKing]

Dak will sign a new deal. I expect him to have 3 thousand-yard receivers and amass near 6,000 receiving yards. Super Bowl Champs!!

 

[Idgit]

We’ll get a four year deal done before camp, if nothing else. Hopefully, they can make a five year deal work. This really is a great spot for Dak long-term. He’ll sign eventually.