Let me ask a question here. Does paying a QB, any QB, 35-40M a season with the existing contracts in place and cap implications allow the team to really address the defense?
I admit it, my stance here is tentative because they haven't proven they can build a contention defense regardless of who the QB is or how much they pay him. Hell, the Cowboys had the best QB deal for 4 years since FA came about.
My assumption is that they take a QB in the 1st and pay him over 4 years what they pay Prescott over 1 year allowing them to use that savings on building out the team, mainly the defense. And yes, the old assumption belief applies here.
Where I could be wrong is that taking that QB in this draft not only doesn't strengthen the defense but they end up with a QB not as effective with this team. Because for whatever the reason, Dak Prescott seems to be the only QB that can manage this team. He gets the best out of them.
So, I could easily be wrong about this, fortunately, that would be the first time. The fact is no one knows how well any of these top 5 QB's, Lawrence, Fields, Lance, Trask or Wilson will do in the NFL or with this team. Dak is that devil we know.
And that devil is good enough to get this team there providing the team is built right and that is the gist of this thread. It's not about Prescott vs one of the rooks, it's about trying to help a FO that is just not great at evaluating talent, paying them or finding talent to replace them. Might have done that with Diggs after letting Jones walk so there is always hope.
When hope is in your wheelhouse as a fan as much as it is this one, you don't think like normal fans.