Diehardblues
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 55,143
- Reaction score
- 36,328
No, he hates the way the Jones run Cowboys Football like most of Dallas.lol that guy in the article is a Mega Dak fan... or just really hates the Cowboys, one or the other.
No, he hates the way the Jones run Cowboys Football like most of Dallas.lol that guy in the article is a Mega Dak fan... or just really hates the Cowboys, one or the other.
Russell Wilson money should’ve been more than sufficient. Wilson has taken his team to two Super Bowls and has won a title. He would’ve been two for two had his coaching staff not gone braindead on the goal line call. Dak is very good and I want him signed, but there’s no way he should be paid more than Wilson. He hasn’t earned it.I haven’t seen Dak was officially offered 35. I saw possibly 33-35. I heard Dak would have taken 37 which would have been top dollar. If you aren’t counting Mahommes.
Should of by whose standards?Russell Wilson money should’ve been more than sufficient. Wilson has taken his team to two Super Bowls and has won a title. He would’ve been two for two had his coaching staff not gone braindead on the goal line call. Dak is very good and I want him signed, but there’s no way he should be paid more than Wilson. He hasn’t earned it.
So, another that doesn’t pay attention and has no clue how the cap works. LOL.Every year he brags about all the cap space, and then spends ZERO $$$ in Free Agency....been saying for years that he treats FA money as if its directly taking inheritance out of his pocket. He is a joke!!!
RightEvery year he brags about all the cap space, and then spends ZERO $$$ in Free Agency....been saying for years that he treats FA money as if its directly taking inheritance out of his pocket. He is a joke!!!
Should of by whose standards?
We know every year QB’s raise the bar. Who thought last year Russell deserved to the top paid. Next year it will be Jackson or Watson.
2 or 3 years ago it was Stafford highest paid. It changes almost every year. It’s determined by the market.
It’s not always determined by talent level. There’s always exception determined by need and market.I’ve had this discussion before. Just because player X gets a certain amount of $ doesn’t mean the next one should get more. That’s a completely stupid way to run a business. It’s economic idiocy. Talent, upside, accomplishments, team circumstances, etc. play a part. Derrick Henry just signed a new contract that pays about $3 mil less per year than Zeke got. If the next guy always gets more (which is utterly stupid) why is this? Because Elliott is the better back, is more versatile, and has accomplished more. End of story.
No, and Dak isn’t the best now either. He got an extremely fair and competitive offer. He turned it down. He might regret it in the end. Just because other teams make stupid decisions doesn’t mean all should.It’s not always determined by talent level. There’s always exception determined by need and market.
Did you think Stafford was best QB in 2017?
It’s very common to overpay to sign your guy.
Wasn’t Romo top paid one year he signed a new deal. Who thought he was best in the league at the time?
If we want our QB we do. If not then be prepared to move on and suffer the potential consequences. That’s the brutal business of the NFL.No, and Dak isn’t the best now either. He got an extremely fair and competitive offer. He turned it down. He might regret it in the end. Just because other teams make stupid decisions doesn’t mean all should.
What skepticism? I gave Stephen a compliment. What makes you think you come across as an englishman. Did you read a Shakespeare sonnet?Do you base your skepticism upon your vast knowledge of being an old man?
That’s exactly right. That is the NFL. You do the best you can to make a prudent decision and if it doesn’t work out, you move on. The Cowboys will be fine one way or another.If we want our QB we do. If not then be prepared to move on and suffer the potential consequences. That’s the business of the NFL.
That’s still to be determined and why all of the criticism when you have one but too stubborn or stupid to get him signed.That’s exactly right. That is the NFL. You do the best you can to make a prudent decision and if it doesn’t work out, you move on. The Cowboys will be fine one way or another.
It’s not always determined by talent level. There’s always exception determined by need and market.
Did you think Stafford was best QB in 2017?
It’s very common to overpay to sign your guy.
Wasn’t Romo top paid one year he signed a new deal. Who thought he was best in the league at the time?
https://www.nfl.com/news/tony-romo-signs-108m-contract-with-dallas-cowboys-0ap1000000155364
Simple. Do not overpay and hurt the team in the long run. For the last time, it’s not remotely like the FO lowballed Dak. It was a great offer. Just because he didn’t take it doesn’t change that fact.That’s still to be determined and why all of the criticism when you have one but too stubborn or stupid to get him signed.
You’re not comparing apples to apples. QB contracts have gotten out of control and a mistake can destroy a team for several years.If we had to pick between paying Dak, Zeke, Cooper or Dlaw would we all agree on not paying Dak?
We’ll just put everything on hold until we find another QB.
It doesn’t matter. Without a franchise QB you got nothing. It made them more than they would have had without him,By the way, how has that Stanford signing worked out for Detroit? Made them into a powerhouse, didn’t he! Your example makes my case that the next guy shouldn’t get paid more than everybody before him just because he’s the next guy? Again, that’s a lunatic way to do business.
I understand but it didn’t get the job done . So, who cares.Simple. Do not overpay and hurt the team in the long run. For the last time, it’s not remotely like the FO lowballed Dak. It was a great offer. Just because he didn’t take it doesn’t change that fact.