Twitter: SI Breer and Spotrac comment on Dak's 2021 contract

[Kingofholland]

No, he wasnt near the top of the market, he wasnt even in the top 20% of QB's.

If you're equating Bree's pay comparison to Dak, he'd be getting less than $32m (which he isnt going to sign for).

Brees was tied for 4th for most cash spent on a QB. Cap figure was lower but a 6 year 60 million contract was a lot of money back then.

 

[dthahn]

OK........lol

Brilliant response!!! Maybe I'm expecting too much by wanting a more well reasoned, logical, thoughtful response! Thanks for your 2 cents!!

 

[CowboyoWales]

You are likely one of the people who have been wrong about this oh every week for 3 years now and yet are still too stupid to pick up the obvious... QB price only goes up.

The shrinking cap hasn't prevented positional high deals across the board:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommyb...massive-contract-extension-week/#70e590247faf

All of those contracts (except Kupp) are through 2024, something Dak didnt want.

If Dak want's $40m he will have to look at 4+ or it's Indianapolis.

 

[CowboyoWales]

Brees was tied for 4th for most cash spent on a QB. Cap figure was lower but a 6 year 60 million contract was a lot of money back then.

No, average per year he was in the top ten only once.

 

[dthahn]

The defense Has nothing to do with Dak' s or anyone's contract. These guys were brought in to play a specialized scheme that Marinelli and Richard devised. They just don't fit into this system. Has nothing to do with Dak, Lawrence, Amari etc etc.

You really didn't pay attention at all to the negotiations during the last off-season, have you? Stephen Jones stated on several occasions that they were not going to overpay Dak BECAUSE it would limit them from building the team for long-term success. That is exactly why Stephen would not give in to Dak and his agent's demands for more money or less years in the contract. It has EVERYTHING to do with Dak's contract!!!! It certainly does NOT have anything to do with the defensive scheme???!!!

 

[ondaedg]

You really didn't pay attention at all to the negotiations during the last off-season, have you? Stephen Jones stated on several occasions that they were not going to overpay Dak BECAUSE it would limit them from building the team for long-term success. That is exactly why Stephen would not give in to Dak and his agent's demands for more money or less years in the contract. It has EVERYTHING to do with Dak's contract!!!! It certainly does NOT have anything to do with the defensive scheme???!!!

Look man this isn’t football 101. Dak could be playing for the Toronto Argonauts and our defense would still be the worst in the league. If we had Dinucci as our starter we would still have the worst defense in the league. This defensive roster has to turn over before Nolan’s or any other DC’s scheme will work for them. That doesn’t mean you sign more big dollar free agents. We spent money on the defense this offseason and the results speak for themselves. It’s going to take a couple of drafts and some roster churn.

If you want the luxury of having one of the best quarterbacks you have to pay for it. It’s that simple. And if you think you can win without one well good luck at that.

 

[jterrell]

All of those contracts (except Kupp) are through 2024, something Dak didnt want.

If Dak want's $40m he will have to look at 4+ or it's Indianapolis.

He would have taken 5 last year at 40+. That wasn't the offer.
Dak will sign next year for what he wanted last year or MORE barring some insanely rare complication.

Realistically he has already had surgery and will sign in a few months before he's even 100% at a better than Cowboys final offer from the prior off-season.
End of day it just doesn't pay to wait on a QB because those salaries only go one direction.

Also the length of deal is a Cowboys mgmt failure! They didn;t extend him like these other teams did. You add 4 new years to an existing deal and Bam 5 or 6 years ....

 

[jterrell]

Look man this isn’t football 101. Dak could be playing for the Toronto Argonauts and our defense would still be the worst in the league. If we had Dinucci as our starter we would still have the worst defense in the league. This defensive roster has to turn over before Nolan’s or any other DC’s scheme will work for them. That doesn’t mean you sign more big dollar free agents. We spent money on the defense this offseason and the results speak for themselves. It’s going to take a couple of drafts and some roster churn.

If you want the luxury of having one of the best quarterbacks you have to pay for it. It’s that simple. And if you think you can win without one well good luck at that.

Dallas will likely go get a better Defensive coaching staff this off-season AND add players.
And they'll definitely run it back with Dak once healthy because an improved defense, healthy OTs and Dak plus this WR corps is a true title contender.

The alternative is to go backwards.

 

[dckid]

IF they pick up where they left off when the deadline passed, the new deal should get done fairly quickly. Remember Dak was ready to accept that deal but time ran out. See no reason it WOULD NOT still be on the table. Avoids the tag and locking up $37.......

Sorry I am not worried about Dak. He will be fine no matter if he plays for us or goes and plays for 8 other teams.
There will be teams lined up to sign him I guarantee it.
My focus is how do the Cowboys get better? What to do about the LT position?
DT?, CB? Safety?, Guard
Signing Dak will not solve any of that.
There is no value in going 6-10 or 7-9. This team as it is currently built WILL not be any different than the past 25 years.
We need to get lucky in the draft.

 

[jterrell]

Sorry I am not worried about Dak. He will be fine no matter if he plays for us or goes and plays for 8 other teams.
There will be teams lined up to sign him I guarantee it.
My focus is how do the Cowboys get better? What to do about the LT position?
DT?, CB? Safety?, Guard
Signing Dak will not solve any of that.
There is no value in going 6-10 or 7-9. This team as it is currently built WILL not be any different than the past 25 years.
We need to get lucky in the draft.

This is a likely playoff team given the schedule of remaining games.
It may be an ugly backed in 8-8 playoff team but a playoff team nonetheless.

The NFL isn't the NBA, it isn't going 3-13 that makes you great. It's proper mgmt of resources and the off-seasons.

The Chiefs went 10-6 then drafted Pattrick Mahomes.
The same year WAYYYY worse teams selected Mitch Trubisky, Solomon Thomas, Leonard Fournette and John friggin Ross over Pat.

What to do about the LT position? Likely nothing. Tyron is going to have a year to get healthy and they'll run it back with Tyron and Knight as his back up.
DT? --DAL has drafted DT early the past 2 seasons. They'll consider another selection I'm sure but they need growth from within here as THill and Gallimore both need to be able to play given where they were drafted.
CB? Tougher call here as we don't know how they feel about Chido. But ABrown and T Diggs are coming back. Likely need 1 CB here from FA/ early Draft
Safety? You'd seriously think a draft choice is used here early top pair with XWoods but they've held off this long.
Guard Gotta see what they have in McGovern over rest of the season. Mid to late pick at OG would make a lot of sense.

I'd actually feel pretty good about a draft that brought DT, CB. S. OG in the first 4 rounds(DAL has 5 picks).
Value is ripe for OG/S in 2-4 rounds and LB/DL/CB/DT are common recent Dallas targets in the top 60 picks.

 

[CowboyoWales]

He would have taken 5 last year at 40+. That wasn't the offer.
Dak will sign next year for what he wanted last year or MORE barring some insanely rare complication.

Realistically he has already had surgery and will sign in a few months before he's even 100% at a better than Cowboys final offer from the prior off-season.
End of day it just doesn't pay to wait on a QB because those salaries only go one direction.

Also the length of deal is a Cowboys mgmt failure! They didn;t extend him like these other teams did. You add 4 new years to an existing deal and Bam 5 or 6 years ....

So what did Dak want last year? From what was reported he wanted 3 years (so 2 years commencing from 2021).

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Give Dak a 4 year deal coming off a catastrophic injury?


Yea not happening. He will be tagged

Why would the team give him a 4 year deal, rather then a 5 year deal?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Look man this isn’t football 101. Dak could be playing for the Toronto Argonauts and our defense would still be the worst in the league. If we had Dinucci as our starter we would still have the worst defense in the league. This defensive roster has to turn over before Nolan’s or any other DC’s scheme will work for them. That doesn’t mean you sign more big dollar free agents. We spent money on the defense this offseason and the results speak for themselves. It’s going to take a couple of drafts and some roster churn.

If you want the luxury of having one of the best quarterbacks you have to pay for it. It’s that simple. And if you think you can win without one well good luck at that.

First of all, the term "one of the best quarterbacks" is subjective at best. But lest say he is, is he a QB who can transcend available talent and win you a championship? If he isn't one of those guys, then what sense does it make to pay out a huge contract to a QB at all? Does it make more sense to avoid that and simply build on improving your roster? I mean, the results of paying a good QB who can't push you to a championship is not really much different then paying a guy who might be a little less talented but cost significantly less.

 

[CowboyoWales]

First of all, the term "one of the best quarterbacks" is subjective at best. But lest say he is, is he a QB who can transcend available talent and win you a championship? If he isn't one of those guys, then what sense does it make to pay out a huge contract to a QB at all? Does it make more sense to avoid that and simply build on improving your roster? I mean, the results of paying a good QB who can't push you to a championship is not really much different then paying a guy who might be a little less talented but cost significantly less.

Yep, that's my point about whether Dak insisted on a 2 year deal (assuming he would only sign a 3 year pre-season), as it'll cost us $45m aav (the equivalent of tag figures for 2021/22). If our defense is that bad (and we wont be in contention for NFCC game) then there's no point in retaining him, rather spend the money on defense.

 

[ondaedg]

So what did Dak want last year? From what was reported he wanted 3 years (so 2 years commencing from 2021).

who said three years?

 

[ondaedg]

First of all, the term "one of the best quarterbacks" is subjective at best. But lest say he is, is he a QB who can transcend available talent and win you a championship? If he isn't one of those guys, then what sense does it make to pay out a huge contract to a QB at all? Does it make more sense to avoid that and simply build on improving your roster? I mean, the results of paying a good QB who can't push you to a championship is not really much different then paying a guy who might be a little less talented but cost significantly less.

transcend available talent? Seriously? Lol. The guy was shooting lasers out of his eyeballs with the football.

 

[jterrell]

So what did Dak want last year? From what was reported he wanted 3 years (so 2 years commencing from 2021).

He wanted 4 years 35M per year.
Team offered 5 years and 35M per

There were issues with GTD and structure of that money bnut those re the basics as we know it.

Dak's agent countered with 5 years and 37M avg and DAL said no.
So they got really close and Dak got involved and he was interested but had issues with the structure of the 35M per year offer and time ran out before they could fix it.

 

[jterrell]

He wanted 4 years 35M per year.
Team offered 5 years and 35M per

There were issues with GTD and structure of that money bnut those re the basics as we know it.

Dak's agent countered with 5 years and 37M avg and DAL said no.
So they got really close and Dak got involved and he was interested but had issues with the structure of the 35M per year offer and time ran out before they could fix it.

So remove this year and he could sign next year for an offer of 4 years and 37M based on HIS prior offer.
OR the team could add a year at another 2M per year to make it 5 years at 39M.

I think that is probably about right. 5 years at 39M with some kickers like NFL MVP, SB MVP, SB win that make it possible to earn 40M per year.

 

[CowboyoWales]

So remove this year and he could sign next year for an offer of 4 years and 37M based on HIS prior offer.
OR the team could add a year at another 2M per year to make it 5 years at 39M.

I think that is probably about right. 5 years at 39M with some kickers like NFL MVP, SB MVP, SB win that make it possible to earn 40M per year.

Im happy with 4 or 5, my concern was always the CAP issues in 2021 and 2022. 4 years (preferably 5) will give much needed flexibility.

 

[jterrell]

Im happy with 4 or 5, my concern was always the CAP issues in 2021 and 2022. 4 years (preferably 5) will give much needed flexibility.

DAL mgmt could have extended him when he had those cheapo years left on his rookie deal.
That's what other teams have done. The player takes less to get the big bonus early and the team gets to reap the cap benefits by spreading the bonus out over 6 years.
But minus those, it's gonna hit the cap pretty hard now.
Might can get it down to say 20M but anything more makes later years really untenable.