TLDR: Letting Dak walk hurts this franchise a lot more than it helps us, in both the short and long term.
I have gone back and forth on the Dak-Dilemma for months. I am not a Dak hater. I consider myself a Dak-realist. He is not "elite" in my opinion (Mahommes, Rodgers are the only 2 QBs this year that qualify as elite in my estimation). Nor is he "mediocre" or "average" as many on this site claim. He is good. At times, he is really good. At other times, his play is borderline average.
And so we have arrived at a crossroads. To pay or not to pay? 2 years ago-- fans were arguing on whether or not he was worth 30 mil per year. Many said "not worth more than 25". Then Wentz and Goff signed-- and the needle moved to 34-35 mil per, and the counter was "not worth more 30". Then Mahommes and Watson signed, and the conversation is now 40 mil per and the counter is now "not worth more than 35". The simple truth is the QB market has been drastically reset over the past 2 years, and the cost of good QB play has significantly risen. Had we signed Dak 2 years ago for 30 mil, we would be in the middle of a sweetheart of a deal. But I digress....
If you let him walk... you gain cap space, yes-- but what do you lose? I've been thinking about the following items:
1. Fractured Locker-room. The players love him. He is the unquestioned leader and this is "Dak's team". If we choose to not pay him, the move will NOT be well received by the players and a riff occurs and eyebrows are raised. Add to that the pressure you put on Dak's replacement to fill his shoes on the field, and with his buddies off it-- and you have a bad situation ready to explode.
2. You lose top 10 level QB play on the field. No-- he is not top 3. But he is not middling either. IMO-- he is trending up, and his quality of play is top 10 in the NFL-- and that will win a lot of games. If you let him leave-- how do you replace his production?
3. Leadership intangibles. Related to point #1 for sure-- but Dak may have the best leadership skill of any QB in the NFL right now. Yes, Rodgers is a HOF player, but some of his teammates hate the guy. Mahommes is a stud and well-liked-- but Dak just is a natural born leader. He says the right things. He does the right things. He is football smart, but he has a high emotional IQ as well. Yes, you could trade up to draft a rookie-- but what you might gain (stress "might") in the football talent category, you more than likely lose a TON when it comes to leadership and "face of the franchise" factor.
4. You stand to lose Rep/Cred. If you let Dak walk, and he gets signed by another team, and hoists a Lombardi-- you will forever be the FO that "couldn't get a deal done with a high caliber franchise QB". Ouch. This franchise is already a laughing stock-- but that would take things to a new low-- especially if the "solution" they bring in to replace Dak doesn't pan out.
Therefore-- the best thing for the entire franchise is to sign Dak to a 4-5 year deal. We will overpay. But the number most fans are comfortable with paying him has already moved from 25 million per year 2 years ago, to 35 million per year now. As a fan-- Are you really willing to let him walk and potentially suffer the fallout over a 5 million per year difference?
....and I asked them who they want in FA and how much they cost and is that going to make the defense dominant, I hear nothing. most of them have no answer. their only point is that I don't want to pay Dak 40M...I just don't like the number and a lot of them are ok with 35 but as you said, 5M is not the difference of having a dominant defense and not having a dominant defense....
