News: Details Emerge From The Cowboys Current Offer To Prescott

[Gangsta Spanksta]

It’s going to be difficult to build a better defense unless we do it thru the draft. Our key offensive talent though is under contract for next 4 years.

Basically Dak and our offensive talent and Cap heavy group will need to be our strength carrying us. Further than they did last year as the #1 offense.

Not to mention that in today's NFL having a top defense and a top offense is hard to do. For most teams it is either or.

 

[Fletch]

Dak is awesome. 92.7% of fans love Dak. The other 7.3% are known haters. Show yourselves, and one day you too will be forgiven!

 

[kskboys]

Ok so you TOO agree he wasn't cut because of his contract.

The contract was definitely a factor.


W/ the Rams, it's the total pic. By overpaying Gurley and Goff and I'd imagine Ramsey, they forced to start cutting/not resigning valuable players such as Brockers. I don't know their roster all that well, as I'm not a Rams fan, but I've seen it happen all too often to not conclude that bloated contracts are not a big part of their problem. Didn't Whitworth leave also? Before last season, I do remember that Saffold and Sullivan, OL's, left, and their OL wasn't near what it was.

Once again, you start paying a few players huge amounts, and your team starts going downhill. SEA is fighting this right now.

Since we've had example after example after example over the last few years(Including our own Cowboys in both the early/mid 90's and around 07), I'm just not seeing how anyone can logically refute the bloated contracts angle.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yes and we all know that definitions used in business other than the NFL have little or no meaning with the NFL. And your complete exaggeration on the oh so many top ten picks that both don't get 5th year options exercised and CUT is a total and absurd exaggeration. Yes there have over the years players taken in the top 10 that were just allowed to go into free agency without trying to resign them but very few. Again you tried and failed to equate that to market value in the NFL, not some big corporation that trades on Wall Street. Again if market value in the NFL, repeat the NFL, isn't based on the known amount of money available by both players and teams and what it will take to get those players signed to bigger and bigger contracts every year then there is no such think as market value in the NFL. Don't bother to reply I'm tire of trying to educate you on the NFL market value.
.

We all know that? OK.......

I think you have that in your head but by no means may you include me. I know what the term means. You pretend whatever you wish. Convince whomever you believe you can. I'm done with this. In the face of actual definition, you create this madness.

Your on your own....

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I agree i never said he was, he was cut because of his knee this year, i don't think the Rams think it will hold up so they used his knee to get out of his deal a year earlier than they would have been forced to had he stayed and played well.

But you know this initially started because I said Goff's contract wasn't why Cooks and Gurley got cut?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

The contract was definitely a factor.


W/ the Rams, it's the total pic. By overpaying Gurley and Goff and I'd imagine Ramsey, they forced to start cutting/not resigning valuable players such as Brockers. I don't know their roster all that well, as I'm not a Rams fan, but I've seen it happen all too often to not conclude that bloated contracts are not a big part of their problem. Didn't Whitworth leave also? Before last season, I do remember that Saffold and Sullivan, OL's, left, and their OL wasn't near what it was.

Once again, you start paying a few players huge amounts, and your team starts going downhill. SEA is fighting this right now.

Since we've had example after example after example over the last few years(Including our own Cowboys in both the early/mid 90's and around 07), I'm just not seeing how anyone can logically refute the bloated contracts angle.

My point is though Goff's deal shouldn't be a issue. Its only a issue now because of how Goff played last year. Gurley and Cook didn't get dealt because of Goff's contract.

 

[dreameaglegreen]

The point is NOBODY here nor those sportswriters who speculate or start rumors have ANY hard facts to back them up. You again bring up that 40 mil rumor. WHY? Do you think your 37-38 mil gestamate makes more sense then?
.

I bring up 40 million because yes that's the rumor, but also if he plays 3 years on the franchise tag he'd average 41.09 million a year which is a hard fact. Realistically they won't or shouldn't franchise him a 3rd year it's just to expensive, with the only option to let him walk. Middle ground is $37-38 million on a long term contract, does that make more sense to you? I reposted what i said earlier below incase you had any questions on the numbers. Thanks for the input

He's not greedy. He has all the leverage right now. His situation is much different than goeff or wentz. The facts are this
1st yr franchise $31.409 million
2nd yr franchise $37.680 million ( 20% increase highly likely to be franchised again)
3rd yr franchise $54.2 (44% increase unlikely to be franchised)

Doesn't matter if you think he's a top qb or not, or even if he is worth it. This is his franchise compensation.

He's getting almost 70 million for 2yrs guaranteed. If dallas does franchise a 3rd yr that's an average of 41 million per yr. If they don't he's a free agent and his market value could skyrocket to the highest bidder. I don't see him signing a long term deal for less than $37-$38 million per year. You also have to factor in that 2 yrs from now the qb average cost will rise, and fans are complaining that he's greedy because he won't sign a 5yr $35 million per yr. contract when he already is getting $35 million for 2 yrs. I think Dallas made a mistake using the exclusive franchise tag.

 

[mmohican29]

He's not greedy. He has all the leverage right now. His situation is much different than goeff or wentz. The facts are this
1st yr franchise $31.409 million
2nd yr franchise $37.680 million ( 20% increase highly likely to be franchised again)
3rd yr franchise $54.2 (44% increase unlikely to be franchised)

Doesn't matter if you think he's a top qb or not, or even if he is worth it. This is his franchise compensation.

He's getting almost 70 million for 2yrs guaranteed. If dallas does franchise a 3rd yr that's an average of 41 million per yr. If they don't he's a free agent and his market value could skyrocket to the highest bidder. I don't see him signing a long term deal for less than $37-$38 million per year. You also have to factor in that 2 yrs from now the qb average cost will rise, and fans are complaining that he's greedy because he won't sign a 5yr $35 million per yr. contract when he already is getting $35 million for 2 yrs. I think Dallas made a mistake using the exclusive franchise tag.

You've made a mistake not realizing that a simple injury in training camp this season can throw all of the above guarantees out the window. Then the Cowboys would be forced to draft, say... a Jalen Hurts type QB much higher than his actual value.

 

[gjkoeppen]

I bring up 40 million because yes that's the rumor, but also if he plays 3 years on the franchise tag he'd average 41.09 million a year which is a hard fact. Realistically they won't or shouldn't franchise him a 3rd year it's just to expensive, with the only option to let him walk. Middle ground is $37-38 million on a long term contract, does that make more sense to you? I reposted what i said earlier below incase you had any questions on the numbers. Thanks for the input

He's not greedy. He has all the leverage right now. His situation is much different than goeff or wentz. The facts are this
1st yr franchise $31.409 million
2nd yr franchise $37.680 million ( 20% increase highly likely to be franchised again)
3rd yr franchise $54.2 (44% increase unlikely to be franchised)

Doesn't matter if you think he's a top qb or not, or even if he is worth it. This is his franchise compensation.

He's getting almost 70 million for 2yrs guaranteed. If dallas does franchise a 3rd yr that's an average of 41 million per yr. If they don't he's a free agent and his market value could skyrocket to the highest bidder. I don't see him signing a long term deal for less than $37-$38 million per year. You also have to factor in that 2 yrs from now the qb average cost will rise, and fans are complaining that he's greedy because he won't sign a 5yr $35 million per yr. contract when he already is getting $35 million for 2 yrs. I think Dallas made a mistake using the exclusive franchise tag.

I just don't get it that you AGAIN use a unsubstantiated rumor as some means to give your opinion some credit. Next you use a speculation by a sportswriter that does not quote anyone involved with the contract negotiations as some certain thing.as far as money and years.

I'll say again that anyone can compute what the franchise tag will be for the next 3 years. What none of use know for certain is what the actual dollar amount is, how much is guaranteed and if there is any point where the contract is voidable. All we have is speculation by sportswriters and that's it. For all we know they may have agreed to money per season and the Cowboys won't budge from a 5 year deal We just don't know. Based on things that Prescott has said like he doesn't expect to be paid more than Wilson without a ring tells me that those rumors of 40 mil a year are just speculation.
.

 

[Little Jr]

You can't look at it like this because what Wentz and Goff signed were extensions tacked on to the back of their remaining two years under their rookie deals.

And you are selectively choosing a calculation that looks favorable for Dak here. How about this?

Wentz signed a 4 year extension with $107MM in guaranteed that was essentially spread over 6 years. That's $17.8MM guaranteed per year. If Dak signed his 5 year, $106MM guaranteed money contract, his avg guarantee per year would be higher than Wentz at $21.2MM.

The other devil in the detail we don't know............ the guaranteed at signing. What's that number? Wilson got $70MM guaranteed at signing, Wentz $66MM, Goff only got $57MM guaranteed at signing.

Cowboys had a chance to sign him last year and have that extra year, they chose not to. The years was also a issue then, they wanted 5+. Adding the new money to old money is a way for the FO and fans to justify a big contract. They can say, it you add the years its really not that bad. Agents arent considering that when they are negotiating. They are negotiating new money and could care less about how many years left on the current deal to make the team and fans feel better about themselves.

I agree the GTD at signing is important. If they want Dak on a 5yr deal they should offer a contract like Ryan got. Ryan is 1 of 2 qbs that have signed a 5yr deal the past couple of years. They compensated him well for doing it by FULLY GTDing 94m of his 100m total GTD. The next closest to him is Rogers at 77m, 17m less than Ryan. To show how good that is and how ****** dak 106m is, Ryan was FULLY GTD 62% of his total contract. If Dak was to sign a 5yr deal, like the Cowboys want, for the total GTD of 106m being reported, it would be 60% of his total contract. So Dak would get less % of total GTD than Ryan got fully GTD. If the Cowboys want him on a 5yr deal, they will still have to go up from the 106m total gtd to ~115m and the FULLY GTD ~109m. If they offer him that and he said no, that would be on him.

My point will remain the same. If the report is true, and its 35m per and 106m GTD, and all that is holding it up is the years, then thats on the Cowboys. If Dak is willing to accept the 35m and 106m, but wants it on a 4yr deal, hes already taken under market. Hes getting less % GTD than both Goff and Wentz and hes getting actual less $s than Goff, Wentz and Wilson. Why would he sign it for a 5yr deal and make it less valuable and even more under market?

 

[dreameaglegreen]

You've made a mistake not realizing that a simple injury in training camp this season can throw all of the above guarantees out the window. Then the Cowboys would be forced to draft, say... a Jalen Hurts type QB much higher than his actual value.

Incorrect, once he signs the contract his salary is fully guaranteed. The future tags are not, which is why it is a bit of a gamble to not sign a long term contract and playing year to year. That's part of the give and take, not holding out for $40 million and settling for $37-38. Daulton is a great backup, I know how important that position is, it could be the difference from winning and losing a super bowl.

 

[DBOY3141]

The contract was definitely a factor.


W/ the Rams, it's the total pic. By overpaying Gurley and Goff and I'd imagine Ramsey, they forced to start cutting/not resigning valuable players such as Brockers. I don't know their roster all that well, as I'm not a Rams fan, but I've seen it happen all too often to not conclude that bloated contracts are not a big part of their problem. Didn't Whitworth leave also? Before last season, I do remember that Saffold and Sullivan, OL's, left, and their OL wasn't near what it was.

Once again, you start paying a few players huge amounts, and your team starts going downhill. SEA is fighting this right now.

Since we've had example after example after example over the last few years(Including our own Cowboys in both the early/mid 90's and around 07), I'm just not seeing how anyone can logically refute the bloated contracts angle.

Brockers resigned with Rams after he failed Baltimore physical. Whitworth resigned with Rams. Saffold went to Titans. Sullivan I don't think has resigned with anyone.

 

[mmohican29]

Incorrect, once he signs the contract his salary is fully guaranteed. The future tags are not, which is why it is a bit of a gamble to not sign a long term contract and playing year to year. That's part of the give and take, not holding out for $40 million and settling for $37-38. Daulton is a great backup, I know how important that position is, it could be the difference from winning and losing a super bowl.

It's absolutely guaranteed for the first year, but he has to sign the franchise tag twice or three times in your scenario. Also, Dallas has to be willing to pay him whatever that franchise tag is worth. I could see a Cousins situation here and the end of Dak in Dallas post 2020. I'd prefer that not to happen, but it definitely could.

 

[jaythecowboy]

The point is: if your quarterback takes up too high of a percentage of your salary cap, then you can't afford to surround him with talent. Rush to make the wrong deal, and Dak will play under teams that are less talented than the one he joined the team on.

These extended negotiations have only resulted in the Cowboys paying more money in the end. In fact they probably could have gotten Dak done for less than they are offering now if they would have came with this offer after his third season.

 

[plasticman]

"Reportedly" = Jerry Jones propoganda

Why is it that one side is constantly shooting their mouth off while the other side is completely silent.

It seems to me that if your position was generally considered to be justified then you wouldn't feel the need to solicit public opinion.

 

[dreameaglegreen]

I just don't get it that you AGAIN use a unsubstantiated rumor as some means to give your opinion some credit. Next you use a speculation by a sportswriter that does not quote anyone involved with the contract negotiations as some certain thing.as far as money and years.

I'll say again that anyone can compute what the franchise tag will be for the next 3 years. What none of use know for certain is what the actual dollar amount is, how much is guaranteed and if there is any point where the contract is voidable. All we have is speculation by sportswriters and that's it. For all we know they may have agreed to money per season and the Cowboys won't budge from a 5 year deal We just don't know. Based on things that Prescott has said like he doesn't expect to be paid more than Wilson without a ring tells me that those rumors of 40 mil a year are just speculation.
.

What prescott says and what his agent says and does could be 2 different things. To use your words, none of use know for certain (think you meant none of us know). I'll say it again, The facts are, IF he is franchised 3 years in a row he would average $41.09 million a year. That has to be a factor in the negotiating. The cowboys don't have to budge and neither does dak. But that isn't a solution to the problem.

 

[Mr_437]

$35 mill a year and over $100 million guaranteed and the dude is saying "nah, not good enough".

Seriously, is there anybody on this board that thinks Dak is worth this type of coin? Being the highest paid player in the history of the entire NFL?

Dude has one playoff win...………..ONE PLAYOFF WIN!!!!!

I'm sorry, but Dak is not worth this much, he just aint. I like the guy, have his jersey I wear on gamedays, but no way in hell am I making Dak the highest paid player in the history of the league. Call me hater all you want, but dude aint worth it.

Heck I remember when I was frowned up in the face when ppl were saying $25M per season...

 

[starfan1]

Dak gets that contract? Man— he better win the SB or he will be the most hated QB in Dallas history (albeit the richest one lol)

he already is lol.

 

[Gangsta Spanksta]

This is like paying $75 for a gallon of milk.

but in *some* years $75 dollars for milk will be a deal so we should go ahead and pay that price now!

 

[aikemirv]

"Reportedly" = Jerry Jones propoganda

Why is it that one side is constantly shooting their mouth off while the other side is completely silent.

It seems to me that if your position was generally considered to be justified then you wouldn't feel the need to solicit public opinion.

They know it is more than justified so they are not embarrassed to give it. Dak should be embarrassed for asking for more - thus the silence!