News: SDFW: Dallas Cowboys: Why do fans always side with ownership?

[Risen Star]

I’m on whomever’s side helps us win championships. I don’t care how they do it, just do it!

I generally side with ownership in sports because they care more about the franchise. Players care about themselves. They come and go and just want as much as they can get while they're here. Whether that's with your team or another.

There's a bit more of a connection with an owner as you're in this for the long haul with them. I don't feel that with players. I have a genuine dislike for the players of today. It's very rare for me to be a fan of one.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Since Dak entered the league in 2016, Dak is top-5 in wins, tied for second in game-winning drives, tied for fourth in offensive touchdowns among quarterbacks, thrown for 17,634 yards, 106 touchdowns, 40 interceptions, and has a career passer rating of 97.3.

Most of that article was blah, but I found the quote above interesting.

 

[CWR]

In a general sense, it’s because ownership takes the risk. But it has nothing to do with greed. It’s a recognition that resources in the salary cap era are scarce.

And in that sense, I don’t think they’re really siding with ownership; I’ve yet to meet the fan who defends Jaylon and Zeke’s contracts.

Exactly. No one feels sorry for ownership. We just hope to get the best possible deals in order to have enough cap space to maximize the roster potential.

 

[Aven8]

I generally side with ownership in sports because they care more about the franchise. Players care about themselves. They come and go and just want as much as they can get while they're here. Whether that's with your team or another.

There's a bit more of a connection with an owner as you're in this for the long haul with them. I don't feel that with players. I have a genuine dislike for the players of today. It's very rare for me to be a fan of one.

Makes sense. As a fan once a player is done I’m onto the next one. Witten, Romo, don’t care about them anymore. Love Romo and Troy the broadcasters, but don’t think of them anymore as players.

On the other hand we’ve grown up with Jerry. 31 years is a long time. Stephen, Jerry Jr, Charlotte, Spaulding even! Lol.

 

[Jake]

Fans usually side with ownership because of the salary cap and/or just wanting their favorite players to stay.

Some side with ownership out of petty jealousy, odd considering the owners are richer than the players (but see above).

 

[SportsGuru80]

I don't. Nobody ever spent a nickle to watch Jerry sit in the owners suite. Players are the product and careers are short.

Exactly... I personally side with the players 90-95 percent of the time.

 

[aikemirv]

Most football fans have played football at some level, even if backyard, or have been on a team in their lifetime. They "side" with owners because they know what team means and nobody liked the player who thought he was above the team. The money factor ruins everything and too many players have gotten paid and then checked out. In Daks situation, he chose not to accept the deal, not because of a couple million, but because of the respect aspect of the whole NFL fiasco of who is top paid this and that and maybe an extra year of the contract. It is just a bunch of garbage.

Most fans would give their left nut for a chance to do what these guys do for a living and the fact that these guys hold out and try to gain every penny just rubs everyone wrong.

As far as the owners, I don't care if jerry makes $200,000 or $200,000,000 running the Cowboys every year. He should be rewarded for his risk of buying the team. Fundamentals of Capitalism. The players never took a single risk of their own money in their lifetime probably until after playing days. They were catered to in high school and college and were given a free education to play a game and now want to fight tooth and nail for a few extra million.

 

[MarcusRock]

huh? side with ownership?

i'm the only fan i know of that actually likes Jerry Jones and sides with him more times than not.....

this fan base is borderline disgusted with ownership

Until there are contract negotiations, which is what the article is talking about. Case in point, during the Zeke contract standoff, everyone hated Zeke and propped up Prescott as "doing things the right way" in playing out your contract and then negotiating your new one while Zeke was called a greedy bastid for "asking out of turn." Now, after Dak's done things the right way, he's a greedy bastid for not signing a below-market contract offer.

It's pretty plain from where I sit but no one's going to admit it. Regular joe fans don't like seeing players make millions when they're trying to look down on them. Hard to do when they're obliterating you in several of the metrics males like to use to compare themselves to others. The salary cap is a good cover, but this attitude prevails in sports without one. Remember the uproar over Alex Rodriguez and Giancarlo Stanton's deals? What was up with that? It's jealousy in a lot of cases. This is why there's a huge faction of fans that engage in hope-posting that the NFL will fail even as they consume the product religiously. Shouldn't you want football to thrive? Not if they're making money hand-over-fist you don't. We get it.

 

[Bizwah]

There is so much movement with the players. It's hard to establish loyalty with the fans because you don't know who will be here from one year to the next. I haven't bought a jersey in years because of this.

I don't really "side" with management. But as others have said, I want us to have the best team we can field. Usually that requires the players to be on "team friendly" deals.

Not only that, we don't usually hear the owners gripe about not being respected because they don't make as much as other owners. I tire of hearing players gripe about making millions, but not the millions that another player on another team makes. "I make $10 million a year....that's disrespectful....player X makes $15 million at the same position on another team."

Right or wrong, that rubs me the wrong way. I'm not saying that the owners are without blame....it's just that the players are more public.

 

[aikemirv]

I really have no problem with anyone "getting paid". I just don't like how some players go about it:

Zeke - bad form - he had a deal to honor

Demarcus - poor form with the shoulder, wait for contract before surgery scam

Dak - just really should have taken the deal based on it being a fair deal and what being QB of the Cowboys brings you apart from salary and taken a bit of a hit (perceived by some, warranted less by others)for the betterment of the team.

Jaylon - good guy - was happy for him - but he just sucks

Amari - stand up guy who got paid and played well

Leveon Bell - I just tend to laugh at that fool.

 

[gimmesix]

Fans side with owners when it comes to contracts because they don't really understand how the salary cap works.

 

[JD_KaPow]

They are football idiots and they will pay Dak because they are no longer a trend setting team and being trend setters is what made them successful.


Now they are the Mike McCarthy follow what everyone else is doing bunch. Smart decisioning themselves to 8-8.


Mahomes was a huge risk coming out of college and replacing a QB in Alex Smith who was having success.

Signing Brady, getting rid of Winston, and going all in was a huge risk for Tampa.


Dallas is the safe bunch.. Hiring Mike McCarthy, building only through the draft, signing our guys like Dak & Zeke to whatever stupid number the league set.. That’s the Cowboys.

"Signing Brady and getting rid of Winston" is the oddest definition of taking risks that I've ever seen. Drafting a QB in the first round when your starter is a 33-year-old non-star is trend-setting? Seems to me that your definition of "taking a risk" is "doing whatever turned out to work in hindsight."

The Bucs got rid of a QB who threw 30 INTs and signed a reliable QB to a non-bank-breaking contract that they could easily escape if Brady fell off a cliff. It was pretty much the opposite of "taking a risk."

 

[cowboyblue22]

i dont support owner ship i cant stand jerry and his son i am for the players but most of them are pretty much diva's dont have a lot players that i like any more

 

[rnr_honeybadger]

The salary cap is very real and teams that don't manage the cap well by handing out bad contracts to a few average players end up paying the price in being bad.

 

[CATCH17]

"Signing Brady and getting rid of Winston" is the oddest definition of taking risks that I've ever seen. Drafting a QB in the first round when your starter is a 33-year-old non-star is trend-setting? Seems to me that your definition of "taking a risk" is "doing whatever turned out to work in hindsight."

The Bucs got rid of a QB who threw 30 INTs and signed a reliable QB to a non-bank-breaking contract that they could easily escape if Brady fell off a cliff. It was pretty much the opposite of "taking a risk."

Winston was a 25 year old number 1 pick that threw for the most yards in the NFL..


They gave up on him super quick and it’s not like Winston was completely terrible considering his age.

Would the Cowboys have moved on from Winston or Goff under the same circumstances? I think not.

What about drafting Mahomes with Alex Smith on board? Or drafting Kyler Murray after drafting Rosen the previous years?

Dallas is the safe smart team.

 

[ChuckA1]

It's the team over any ONE player. Sorry, but that's the way it is for many DC fans, me included.

 

[dogunwo]

In a general sense, it’s because ownership takes the risk.

The risk is much greater for the player. They put their entire body and health on the line. The owner's risk is spread out across all players and the business model is practically guaranteed to make money. Dallas has been largely mediocre for the last 25 years and yet they continue to make more and more money, and increase in value more and more. What risk is that?

 

[HungryLion]

Most football fans have played football at some level, even if backyard, or have been on a team in their lifetime. They "side" with owners because they know what team means and nobody liked the player who thought he was above the team. The money factor ruins everything and too many players have gotten paid and then checked out. In Daks situation, he chose not to accept the deal, not because of a couple million, but because of the respect aspect of the whole NFL fiasco of who is top paid this and that and maybe an extra year of the contract. It is just a bunch of garbage.

Most fans would give their left nut for a chance to do what these guys do for a living and the fact that these guys hold out and try to gain every penny just rubs everyone wrong.

As far as the owners, I don't care if jerry makes $200,000 or $200,000,000 running the Cowboys every year. He should be rewarded for his risk of buying the team. Fundamentals of Capitalism. The players never took a single risk of their own money in their lifetime probably until after playing days. They were catered to in high school and college and were given a free education to play a game and now want to fight tooth and nail for a few extra million.

Wow. Lol so the owners should make as much money as possible because they took the financial risk.

but the players. Who literally risk severe injury and paralysis on every play. They shouldn’t negotiate for the most money possible......



wow. Just wow.

 

[dogunwo]

I generally side with ownership in sports because they care more about the franchise

This is kind of nonsensical because the owner is the franchise, so they care about themselves too.

 

[dogunwo]

The salary cap is very real and teams that don't manage the cap well by handing out bad contracts to a few average players end up paying the price in being bad.

We destroyed the Eagles for all those bad contracts and mismanaging the cap during the Sam Bradford, DeMarco Murray years. They took a chance and it didn't work. The price they paid? Winning a Super Bowl after retooling quickly.