The Argument For Drafting a QB With the 10 Pick

basel90

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,909
Reaction score
4,287
Playing devil's advocate, okay?

Please no insults and no references to my intelligence or lack thereof.....Nah, never mind!...Asking for mercy is just pouring gasoline on a fire.

Three times in the past 11 seasons the starting QB went down early in the season and it was all over, crash and burn. It would have been four seasons but a fourth round draft choice miraculously had one of the best rookie seasons in history, who expected that?

The Cowboys rolled out a slew of backups, mostly average quarterbacks when they were in their prime. Sometimes they were on one year contracts meaning that, even if they had a good showing, they were gone the following season.

Why not kill two birds with one stone? Draft a top tier QB, if the starter goes down, the rookie gets experience. He could be a legitimate starter the following season in which case the Cowboys trade one of them. Furthermore, when a player gets paid they seem to have the tendency to play soft that season. A legitimate talent backing him up could put a little fire to Dak's backside.

The rookie salary cap allows the Cowboys to draft a QB in the top ten, I think.

You could draft a productive non-QB player in the top ten but what difference would that make if Dak is injured again or if he performs poorly? Look at the value of good young quarterbacks these days. If the Cowboys cultivate a young QB while he serves as a quality backup, the Cowboys could end up with a trade reaping great value for their future.

Look at the history of the Cowboys successful seasons. Where there not two legitimate starters?....Lebaron/Meredith...Staubach/Morton....Staubach/White....Even Roger Staubach once revealed that a reason for his success was how hard he competed with Danny White, knowing how good his competition was. Jimmy Johnson drafted two QB's #1 overall in his first season, giving up the #1 overall pick in 1990 for taking Steve Walsh in the supplemental draft. Jimmy valued competition.

Ok....let 'er rip!
3 main problems .
1) Too many defensive needs
2) cowboys overpaid Dak , and the pressure will be enormous for Dak to perform . Drafting a star QB as backup will create a controversy if Dak falters . Jerry does not like that .
3) cap space is so razor thin .
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
Playing devil's advocate, okay?

Please no insults and no references to my intelligence or lack thereof.....Nah, never mind!...Asking for mercy is just pouring gasoline on a fire.

Three times in the past 11 seasons the starting QB went down early in the season and it was all over, crash and burn. It would have been four seasons but a fourth round draft choice miraculously had one of the best rookie seasons in history, who expected that?

The Cowboys rolled out a slew of backups, mostly average quarterbacks when they were in their prime. Sometimes they were on one year contracts meaning that, even if they had a good showing, they were gone the following season.

Why not kill two birds with one stone? Draft a top tier QB, if the starter goes down, the rookie gets experience. He could be a legitimate starter the following season in which case the Cowboys trade one of them. Furthermore, when a player gets paid they seem to have the tendency to play soft that season. A legitimate talent backing him up could put a little fire to Dak's backside.

The rookie salary cap allows the Cowboys to draft a QB in the top ten, I think.

You could draft a productive non-QB player in the top ten but what difference would that make if Dak is injured again or if he performs poorly? Look at the value of good young quarterbacks these days. If the Cowboys cultivate a young QB while he serves as a quality backup, the Cowboys could end up with a trade reaping great value for their future.

Look at the history of the Cowboys successful seasons. Where there not two legitimate starters?....Lebaron/Meredith...Staubach/Morton....Staubach/White....Even Roger Staubach once revealed that a reason for his success was how hard he competed with Danny White, knowing how good his competition was. Jimmy Johnson drafted two QB's #1 overall in his first season, giving up the #1 overall pick in 1990 for taking Steve Walsh in the supplemental draft. Jimmy valued competition.

Ok....let 'er rip!





Playing devil's advocate on such a foolish issue is just plain foolishness. All of you examples of having that competition was BEFORE the cap and the Cowboys weren't coming off having the worst defense in the league. If Prescott gets injured again and Gilbert turns out to be so bad there will be other QB's that can be signed. The only smart thing to do this draft is to improve the defense. The Cowboys already have a good offense. In the cap era teams have to stay focused on their biggest needs and not on what ifs. I'll give you a what if. What if that QB thought to be a top tier QB ends up like many other QB coming from college touted as sure fire stars only to turn out to be busts. Then the Cowboys would have drafted a bust and in the mean time the defense got ignored again when that pick could have really helped them this season and not maybe sometime down the road.
.
.
 
Last edited:

CowboysFaninHouston

CowboysFaninDC
Messages
31,157
Reaction score
17,675
3 main problems .
1) Too many defensive needs
2) cowboys overpaid Dak , and the pressure will be enormous for Dak to perform . Drafting a star QB as backup will create a controversy if Dak falters . Jerry does not like that .
3) cap space is so razor thin .
why did they over pay Dak? what should they have paid?
 

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....
Messages
58,929
Reaction score
27,716
Well, let me start by saying that I don't see Jerry and the team doing this but if they were smart, they would try and take a talented young QB, at some point soon. Take him high if the value is there.

Here's the thing, Dak's contract is really a three year deal. It's not 5, it's not 4, it's 3 and then, it can be voided. If the team voids it, it's a 26 mil cap hit spread over 2 or 3 seasons.

If you take a good QB and you develop that guy, he's money in the bank. If you have to save yourself from the Shark Tank that is Dak and France, then you have a guy who can step in and give you life.

The idea of planning for the day when Dak might be gone is wise. Remember, it's not just the team on this deal. Dak can decide that he wants to go get more money else where as well and he can leave after three seasons.

It would be very smart to start thinking about a decent QB IMO.
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
Well, let me start by saying that I don't see Jerry and the team doing this but if they were smart, they would try and take a talented young QB, at some point soon. Take him high if the value is there.

Here's the thing, Dak's contract is really a three year deal. It's not 5, it's not 4, it's 3 and then, it can be voided. If the team voids it, it's a 26 mil cap hit spread over 2 or 3 seasons.

If you take a good QB and you develop that guy, he's money in the bank. If you have to save yourself from the Shark Tank that is Dak and France, then you have a guy who can step in and give you life.

The idea of planning for the day when Dak might be gone is wise. Remember, it's not just the team on this deal. Dak can decide that he wants to go get more money else where as well and he can leave after three seasons.

It would be very smart to start thinking about a decent QB IMO.




According to spotrac there is nothing in Prescott's contract that allows him to void his contract if he chooses. there are no tag and no trade clauses but nothing that lets him void out his contract. After the third year the Cowboys have a potential out but nothing that states Prescott has an out. Even at that it would add 26.4 mil to the dead money. So this QB drafted would be sitting for 3 out of his 4 years and then hoping that he's as good as his high draft pick suggests.
.
.
 

sean10mm

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,024
Reaction score
3,000
Dak has a no trade clause AND his contract makes him functionally untradeable anyway.

The only path forward with an expensive QB is to hit on your non-QB players in the draft HARD so they don't cost top money. Spending a top pick on a QB (who is most likely a bust, as most QB draft picks are) just puts you even further behind the 8-ball.
 

basel90

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,909
Reaction score
4,287
why did they over pay Dak? what should they have paid?
We have gone over this my friend . I think 35 million would have been optimal for both sides . Just imagine the situation if Dak gets hurt again . There would be no cap space to bring in a quality replacement for a few years especially via FA . The risk with his current contract is massive , especially with a historically bad defense . the wait for a Super Bowl will be longer .
 

CowboysFaninHouston

CowboysFaninDC
Messages
31,157
Reaction score
17,675
We have gone over this my friend . I think 35 million would have been optimal for both sides . Just imagine the situation if Dak gets hurt again . There would be no cap space to bring in a quality replacement for a few years especially via FA . The risk with his current contract is massive , especially with a historically bad defense . the wait for a Super Bowl will be longer .
yes we have and you have made zero sense all along

if Dak is not the QB, then he is not the QB, even at 400K...but why is he the QB of the team and future at 35 and not at 40. is it value in your head in rating/ranking QBs? because 5M is not the difference between making a superbowl team and not making one. 5M gets you nothing but a low level player these days.

so either he is your QB and over paying a little to make sure you have your QB is worth it. its today's NFL.

or he is not your QB and you want to go look for another one....

35M is worth it, but 40 is not is ridiculous statement.
 

basel90

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,909
Reaction score
4,287
yes we have and you have made zero sense all along

if Dak is not the QB, then he is not the QB, even at 400K...but why is he the QB of the team and future at 35 and not at 40. is it value in your head in rating/ranking QBs? because 5M is not the difference between making a superbowl team and not making one. 5M gets you nothing but a low level player these days.

so either he is your QB and over paying a little to make sure you have your QB is worth it. its today's NFL.

or he is not your QB and you want to go look for another one....

35M is worth it, but 40 is not is ridiculous statement.
You asked what would I have paid max doe Dak. Honestly , even 35 mil is a lot given his injuries and lack of playoff wins and other issues reading defenses . But it is what it is . Ideally Jerry he should have offered him 28 mil as earlier as reported , and Dak would have accepted . But Jerry was late and the rate skyrocketed. That’s Jerry’s fault . Dak is valued around 28 mil , and that would have saved the cowboys 12-18 mil annually . A huge difference that could be used to fix the defense .
Just look at the current roster and you tell me how improved is the defense from last year . And if Dak is Injured , the cowboys will have minimum NFL salary to pay for any replacement ,
Let us hope that scenario does not happen and Dak earns his pay .
 

KB1122

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,148
Reaction score
1,446
I don't care about the salary cap implications. You can figure out a way. If you don't have an elite quarterback, you might as well put 21 high school players out there with him.
 

CowboysFaninHouston

CowboysFaninDC
Messages
31,157
Reaction score
17,675
You asked what would I have paid max doe Dak. Honestly , even 35 mil is a lot given his injuries and lack of playoff wins and other issues reading defenses . But it is what it is . Ideally Jerry he should have offered him 28 mil as earlier as reported , and Dak would have accepted . But Jerry was late and the rate skyrocketed. That’s Jerry’s fault . Dak is valued around 28 mil , and that would have saved the cowboys 12-18 mil annually . A huge difference that could be used to fix the defense .
Just look at the current roster and you tell me how improved is the defense from last year . And if Dak is Injured , the cowboys will have minimum NFL salary to pay for any replacement ,
Let us hope that scenario does not happen and Dak earns his pay .
so if you think he has all those issues (he doesn't), then your 35M value makes zero sense.....

and what injuries or do you mean Injury. that he had operated and recovered and already throwing? is that the ONE?
lack of playoff wins? he is 1-2....Russell wilson is 1-3 in the past 5 years.


so according to you. he is injured (or is it crippled?). he can't read defenses. now you say he is worth 28M!!! does that even make sense? why you think a QB that in your opinion (not facts, but going along with your opinion). can't read defense. is not good. is among the worst in the league...but pay him 28M? why? does that make sense? ...why is a bad QB worth 28M?

also, your math is all over the place...I get the 12M based on your 28M valuation. but 18M? are you trying to say he is worth 22M? that's confusing.

and how do you fix a defense with 12M, when an impact player like lawrence cost 20M a year?
 

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....
Messages
58,929
Reaction score
27,716
You asked what would I have paid max doe Dak. Honestly , even 35 mil is a lot given his injuries and lack of playoff wins and other issues reading defenses . But it is what it is . Ideally Jerry he should have offered him 28 mil as earlier as reported , and Dak would have accepted . But Jerry was late and the rate skyrocketed. That’s Jerry’s fault . Dak is valued around 28 mil , and that would have saved the cowboys 12-18 mil annually . A huge difference that could be used to fix the defense .
Just look at the current roster and you tell me how improved is the defense from last year . And if Dak is Injured , the cowboys will have minimum NFL salary to pay for any replacement ,
Let us hope that scenario does not happen and Dak earns his pay .

I think it's a myth that Dak was ever going to accept a reasonable deal. I think he was always angling for the market deal.

JMO
 

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....
Messages
58,929
Reaction score
27,716
I don't care about the salary cap implications. You can figure out a way. If you don't have an elite quarterback, you might as well put 21 high school players out there with him.

We never figured out a way with Romo. In fact, I'd say most teams don't figure out a way. Most teams do it with young QBs on their rookie deals with a lot of talent around them and then dismantle once your QB comes up on a new deal. I also think it's kind of a fallacy to believe that it takes an "elite" QB. I think QBs are made by systems and talent and Coaching and Organizational stability. All of these guys who get to the NFL, they are all talented. The one who gets the right situation, that's the one who sees success. The most successful QB in the history of the league was not a "elite" QB. He was a 6th round pick. The Greatest QB in the history of our team was not a 1st round pick. He was a 10th round pick but he had the right situation going on and the result was Roger Staubach. The QB doesn't make the team, it's the other way around IMO but I agree, you have to have one. I just don't think they are as rare as they are made out to be. I think the right situation is rare, that's hard to find I think.
 

KB1122

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,148
Reaction score
1,446
We never figured out a way with Romo. In fact, I'd say most teams don't figure out a way. Most teams do it with young QBs on their rookie deals with a lot of talent around them and then dismantle once your QB comes up on a new deal. I also think it's kind of a fallacy to believe that it takes an "elite" QB. I think QBs are made by systems and talent and Coaching and Organizational stability. All of these guys who get to the NFL, they are all talented. The one who gets the right situation, that's the one who sees success. The most successful QB in the history of the league was not a "elite" QB. He was a 6th round pick. The Greatest QB in the history of our team was not a 1st round pick. He was a 10th round pick but he had the right situation going on and the result was Roger Staubach. The QB doesn't make the team, it's the other way around IMO but I agree, you have to have one. I just don't think they are as rare as they are made out to be. I think the right situation is rare, that's hard to find I think.

Staubach would have been a first round pick except for the Navy, probably the #1 overall. The pick he was taken with would be in the fourth round today. He was a higher pick than Dak, IIRC. You're suggesting we use the exceptions to establish the rule.
 

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....
Messages
58,929
Reaction score
27,716
Staubach would have been a first round pick except for the Navy, probably the #1 overall. The pick he was taken with would be in the fourth round today. He was a higher pick than Dak, IIRC. You're suggesting we use the exceptions to establish the rule.

Perhaps, but he wasn't and that's because of Vietnam. That was never going to change. I don't know how you know that it would have been a 4th round pick in todays draft. I don't think there is any way to quantify that but doesn't really matter, that's not the point to me. Teams and established ways of building teams, winning championships are not things that are derived from QBs IMO. Teams figure out how to develop QBs, not how to get lucky in the draft and draft them. You will never be a truly successful organization if your plan is to get lucky and draft that guy every time you need a QB. You have to build in such a way as to create success and that goes for QBs as well. People often point to Patrick Mahomes and say, "See, that's what you can do if you hit on the right QB". Well, that's kind of the point really. Mahomes doesn't make the team. The organization makes Mahomes. Case in point, Tech never posted a winning conference record while Mahomes was there. Not one in 4 years. They only had one winning season and that was 2015 I believe at 7-6. If it's the player, then why wasn't he more successful at Tech? QBs are developed, they are not something that you plug in and it just works IMO.


QBs don't make organizations, it's the other way around IMO.
 

landroverking

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,690
Reaction score
1,883
When you have a starting QB like a Dak, drafting a QB in any round is a no brainer.
You either better yourself or have great trade value.
Dak is a great example of how is works.
 

basel90

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,909
Reaction score
4,287
so if you think he has all those issues (he doesn't), then your 35M value makes zero sense.....

and what injuries or do you mean Injury. that he had operated and recovered and already throwing? is that the ONE?
lack of playoff wins? he is 1-2....Russell wilson is 1-3 in the past 5 years.


so according to you. he is injured (or is it crippled?). he can't read defenses. now you say he is worth 28M!!! does that even make sense? why you think a QB that in your opinion (not facts, but going along with your opinion). can't read defense. is not good. is among the worst in the league...but pay him 28M? why? does that make sense? ...why is a bad QB worth 28M?

also, your math is all over the place...I get the 12M based on your 28M valuation. but 18M? are you trying to say he is worth 22M? that's confusing.

and how do you fix a defense with 12M, when an impact player like lawrence cost 20M a year?
1 - average QBs in the league are paid 22-28 range ,so that is why I say 28 as the max I would pay .
2- I think he does some things well , so he is not a bad QB as you suggest . He is good but not more than 28 mil good . Heck , Brady got paid 26 mil . According to your logic ( or lack of logic ) Brady inferior to dak ? Heck i would take 7 QBs before dak .
3- 12 mil in cap space is enough to pay for 2 top tier defenders if you structure their contracts right .
 

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....
Messages
58,929
Reaction score
27,716
@plasticman The Packers did something similar last year when they drafted QB Love. It torqued Rodgers off.

Truth be told, the Packers did the same thing with Rodgers. They had Farve and they took Rodgers late in the draft.

I guess he can be pissed about it but what comes around, well......... you know.........
 

CowboysFaninHouston

CowboysFaninDC
Messages
31,157
Reaction score
17,675
1 - average QBs in the league are paid 22-28 range ,so that is why I say 28 as the max I would pay .
2- I think he does some things well , so he is not a bad QB as you suggest . He is good but not more than 28 mil good . Heck , Brady got paid 26 mil . According to your logic ( or lack of logic ) Brady inferior to dak ? Heck i would take 7 QBs before dak .
3- 12 mil in cap space is enough to pay for 2 top tier defenders if you structure their contracts right .
again, your approach makes no sense. 12M ain't going to fix this defense. and why would you want an average QB. if your opinion is he is average, then he is not the QB we want at 28M. we want a top 10 QB (which in my opinion he is). so if he is average as you say, then why not go bargain basement and have 35M to go after some defensive difference makers, because 12M at best gets you a good defensive player, not great. or a couple of mid level players and you end up with an average QB and average defense....

you have to realize I am trying to help you make your case. either go bargain basement shopping. or draft. or you go elite. in the middle, you end up in the middle.

with that said, what makes you say he is average, since all stats point to him being above average and in the top 10.
 
Top