Should our players take team friendly deals?

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Is it smart for these players to take less money, when this team has an issue with spending in free agency? I mean they're saving money to do nothing, can someone please make it make sense??

You'd think as cheap as we can be in our spending, we were saving up to make a big move. The big move for us, is our current players being taken care of with new deals!

Can we get rid of the "insanity" and make some moves with this money. There's talk of creating all this cap space, but what good is it if we don't bring substantial help from the outside. Please discuss!!!

why? what's the incentive? I have heard that they make enough money to last a lifetime, etc. and they should do it to win championships, etc. yet when asking the same people would you take a pay cut for your company to make sure they are financially successful and they all bulk. as long as its coming out of somebody else's pocket they are ok with it. but not their own. 99% of NFL don't do this and yet, teams win championships.

further, its about roster building. contracts get done in different ways, money pushed down the line. there is a cap. and there is at the end of your supposed run, dead money and you move on.

so managing the cap is the issue. not taking team friendly deals. this is not in Dak's defense, just how contracts and caps work, so we heard this when it was first signed...we are screwed, 40M and we can't sign anyone, yet the last three years, the cap hit was 17.19, 26 and we had 20M on the cap in 22, 15M in 23. same can be said about other players on the team and their contracts.

again, this is not a cap issue. this is a roster building issue. Jerry is unable to do it.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

NO..........Unless there married to Gisele and their name is Tom Brady!!!!

exactly. I would marry Gisele even if she didn't have that kind of money

 

[btgboys41]

So why do fans get mad at certain players for making too much

I don’t get mad at them for asking for or making too much. However, I just don’t want them lying saying the Super Bowl is the most important thing. That does bother me to want the max, and say the trophy is the mission.

As @MountaineerCowboy said, there should be nuance in aligning pay to ability and not overpaying just because the market says so. There’s a balance. Loser orgs don’t see the nuance, they just go along with the other sheep. They are terrified to move on from a player.

Taking a little less isn’t unheard of and if anyone would do it, I would hope it’s one of the “captains”.

 

[FanofJerry]

Can I get a discount on my burger and beer at the stadium?

And that there folks tells you everything you need to know about player vs owner and money/contracts.

No one wants to touch this?!

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

I don’t get mad at them for asking for or making too much. However, I just don’t want them lying saying the Super Bowl is the most important thing. That does bother me to want the max, and say the trophy is the mission.

As @MountaineerCowboy said, there should be nuance in aligning pay to ability and not overpaying just because the market says so. There’s a balance. Loser orgs don’t see the nuance, they just go along with the other sheep. They are terrified to move on from a player.

Taking a little less isn’t unheard of and if anyone would do it, I would hope it’s one of the “captains”.

The same "fans" that say Jerry cares more about money than winning will defend players taking contracts that directly hurt the teams ability to build a good roster.

You don't pay mansion price for a double wide just because it's a couple blocks down the street from the mansions.

Make it make sense.

 

[Swanny]

Is it smart for these players to take less money, when this team has an issue with spending in free agency? I mean they're saving money to do nothing, can someone please make it make sense??

You'd think as cheap as we can be in our spending, we were saving up to make a big move. The big move for us, is our current players being taken care of with new deals!

Can we get rid of the "insanity" and make some moves with this money. There's talk of creating all this cap space, but what good is it if we don't bring substantial help from the outside. Please discuss!!!

No. The NFL is a business. Make your money while you can.

 

[buybuydandavis]

Is it smart for these players to take less money, when this team has an issue with spending in free agency? I mean they're saving money to do nothing, can someone please make it make sense??

You'd think as cheap as we can be in our spending, we were saving up to make a big move. The big move for us, is our current players being taken care of with new deals!

Can we get rid of the "insanity" and make some moves with this money. There's talk of creating all this cap space, but what good is it if we don't bring substantial help from the outside. Please discuss!!!

Players should take *player* friendly deals.
There are great advantages to being a Cowboy. Jerry should make it clear he expects players to factor those advantages into contract negotiations, and if they don't, they'll be playing elsewhere.

No state income tax, better endorsement deals, better post career opportunities. Jerry brings that to the table with every deal.

So Cowboy players should have discounted contracts *relative to the league*, because relative to the league, Jerry brings a lot more to the table.

But one player, even a QB, taking a discount with the intent to improve the team is just a loser proposition. Even if a QB takes a 50% discount, that only improves the cap 10%.

A core of players would have to get together and say they're willing to take a discount. But the problem is they all think they're worth more than they are anyway. I don't see any way to make that work on *new* contracts. Everyone will feel like a chump because they feel they're giving up more than the other guys.

Maybe a bunch of guys could agree to cut their *existing* contracts, but that's not even conceivable unless that core feels they can "push the team over the top" with that discount.

 

[diamonddelts]

People who ask this question do not understand the way N.F.L. salary cap works. During every collective bargaining agreement, N.F.L. owners and the N.F.L. union agreed to a revenue sharing plan.

This is where the "true pie" is divided between N.F.L owners and the N.F.L. union along with pensions etc.

Once this negotiation is done, that IS where owners have already agreed to share a certain percentage of total revenue to be set aside for the payroll of each team. The owners are GUARANTEED the remaining percentage of total revenue through their own revenue sharing plan.

This is where all the real haggling over N.F.L.total revenue is done during the collective bargaining. It is then the general manager and front office job on how they want to allocate the remaining revenue to each individual player.

So if you truly understand this, why would any player take less to greedy owners who are already guaranteed a percentage of total revenue to be shared amongst them the via the latest NF.L. bargaining agreement?

The burden to field a competitive team is not on the players. That burden is on the general manager and the front office. Why should a player take less? Did N.F.L. owners offer to take less during the collective nargaining agreement?

Owners do not give discounts for tickets, food, or parking. Owners do not give the cable networks or streaming platforms discounte for the rights to display N.F.L. games to the masses.

Yet Jow Blow wants players with limited career lifespans to take less money in order for a inept front office to misuse or waste funds with no guarantee of a Super Bowl.

This question truly vexes me and the sheer deep seated ignorance of some fans on this issue blows my mind..

 

[leeblair]

No

 

[charron]

I do not fault a player for asking for everything they can. I fault the organization for giving it.

I love parsons and all he can do but i'm not giving him 30/year. If we can get him for say maybe 20 then ok but otherwise i'm inclined to see what he could bring in a trade and then decide what to do. If they can turn Parsons into 3 starting defensive guys who are above average that would be a win.

 

[FanofJerry]

I do not fault a player for asking for everything they can. I fault the organization for giving it.

I love parsons and all he can do but i'm not giving him 30/year. If we can get him for say maybe 20 then ok but otherwise i'm inclined to see what he could bring in a trade and then decide what to do. If they can turn Parsons into 3 starting defensive guys who are above average that would be a win.

I am curious what Parsons would fetch from Philly.

Parsons is considered elite. Philly is his boyhood team. Philly is a Division rival of Dallas.

Assuming Philly needed and had the draft assets...Im curious how a deal would look in that scenario compared to a non Division rival. Does Philly low ball Dallas to the point of killing a deal because it doesnt want to help Dallas...or does Philly offer a really good offer if Parsons was gettable?

I get that neither team wants to help the other out...Im just curious if there would be a significant difference in value being offered from Philly vs other teams.

 

[Chasing6]

why? what's the incentive? I have heard that they make enough money to last a lifetime, etc. and they should do it to win championships, etc. yet when asking the same people would you take a pay cut for your company to make sure they are financially successful and they all bulk. as long as its coming out of somebody else's pocket they are ok with it. but not their own. 99% of NFL don't do this and yet, teams win championships.

further, its about roster building. contracts get done in different ways, money pushed down the line. there is a cap. and there is at the end of your supposed run, dead money and you move on.

so managing the cap is the issue. not taking team friendly deals. this is not in Dak's defense, just how contracts and caps work, so we heard this when it was first signed...we are screwed, 40M and we can't sign anyone, yet the last three years, the cap hit was 17.19, 26 and we had 20M on the cap in 22, 15M in 23. same can be said about other players on the team and their contracts.

again, this is not a cap issue. this is a roster building issue. Jerry is unable to do it.

Average career in NFL is only 3.3 years and very few get the big money contracts. So for most it does not last a life time. For those that do, half of them end up blowing it all away.

 

[Swagger]

What is a QB worth who is a high level bus driver but cant win playoff games worth? And how does Dak and his agent present their case during negotiations and how do the Jones'?

Seems like there is a lot of inside info, such has losses being on coaching game plan, that we dont have access to and can only speculate on. Example:

Jones' say Dak is only beating average teams. Dak says film shows he is hitting receivers when right play is called. Dak claims playoff game plan was whack and losses should be on him.

I know negotiations dont play out like that...but how do you present your case to Dak that he is only worth 50M per considering cap inflation and relative to other QB contracts now and in 3 years?

You make interesting points in your posts in this thread.

With regards to Prescott I would be realistic. He's an employee on a salary of $40 million per year. He performed very well in the regular season against bad teams and struggled against good teams. On top of that he had another underwhelming performance in the post season. Some might say the above is typical of a lot of quarterbacks in the league.

I would offer him around a 10% increase including cap inflation so $45 million a season. What really matters is the guaranteed money. If that's unacceptable then he's free to leave. But he would miss out on all the trimmings at being the QB of the Dallas Cowboys and at playing for a good team. There are a few overpaid QBs like Murray but $45 million is about where Prescott should sit amongst the other QBs. He could probably earn $10 million more a season playing for a bad team likely with state tax and without the perks for playing under centre for the Cowboys.

I genuinely think he would test the market but ultimately decide to stay and play for the Cowboys because a contender wouldn't be interested in him for the money he desires imo.

I would adopt that policy to every player according to their actual value. I.e., I would offer Parsons money to make him the highest paid defensive player because...he has been a top 3 defender in the league for three consecutive seasons. You pay the man his worth. He's a blue chip player and difference maker.

For the record I wouldn't offer Prescott a contract at all if I was GM. I don't see him ever winning a Superbowl for any team unless he was the backup. For that reason I would make him a post June 2024 cut. I'm just outlining above what he should be offered if I wanted to keep him.

 

[Whiskey Cowboy]

There's a difference between discounted and team friendly. Patrick Mahommes signed a ten year, half a billion dollar deal as his first extension. Between that and endorsements, he's set for life, as are his kids and grandkids. The initial numbers appeared to be staggering at the time, but by spreading that out over ten years, he gave the team financial flexibility to move money around to sign players and increase his chance at winning Super Bowls. We know how that worked out.

You can complain about this becoming a Dak thread all you want, but his contract is the crux of most of our financial problems right now. He signed a 4 year, $160m deal. Annual average is $10m less than Mahommes, but he gave the team limited financial flexibility, and the product on the field has shown as much. A few extra bucks and we could've addressed the run defense more adequately going into the season. Interior linebackers and defensive tackles aren't expensive, but we were in a position to decide whether to go all in, and risk the consequences, or save some cap to resign CeeDee Lamb and Micah Parsons. We chose to play for the future and fell short.

Tyron Smith signed a record 10 year contract awhile back that allowed for similar financial flexibility the we see from Mahommes. Tom Brady regularly took discounted contracts to win the big dance. HE IS A 7 TIME CHAMPION. Selfishness vs selflessness. Do they want to cement their legacies as all-time greats, or do they want to pile cash into their bank accounts? I'm not suggesting it's wise to always take a discounted rate. Brady was set for life, much like Dak is, before he started taking lesser contracts. Micah and Lamb both deserve to be the highest paid at their positions, but how do they want to be remembered after they've made their money? What legacy does Dak want to leave behind? Now you tell me, is it wise to take one for the team and sign a lesser contract?

 

[bewp7]

no

they can ask for what ever they want and nfl player have a short time to get the most $$$ they can

jerry and stephen should just learn to say no and trade people and not get cought with no choice like they always do or get so attach to people and think they cant be replace

 

[CowboysLakerBamaFan]

People need to understand there's a Player's Union.

Even if a player was the great Grandson of a Rockefeller and had a billion bucks in the bank, there's a ton of pressure from the Player's Union to get every penny.

If one player goes rogue and accepts some "Team friendly" deal, that affects the position average salary...so it actually impacts other players on other teams, or future players. Sometimes even ur own teammates. So the Umion would have a real problem with a player doing that, as well as agents.

Just need to throw out that concept.

(And I hope nobody mentions Brady, who cheated once again by letting Kraft donate millions to "TB12" bs organization, thus circumventing the salary cap.

If there really are Football G*ds", then Brady and Kraft and Bellicheat are going to Football He'll for the dishonest ways they got ahead.

 

[HanD]

All depends on the situation. If you've already cashed in and are getting older or going for a second big contract I'd think about it if I wanted to win and another 10m compared to say 150 mil wasn't going to make a big diff.

But I can't blame anyone for cashing in.

 

[TequilaCowboy]

Players should not feel like they have to play under a team friendly deal unless they want to voluntarily and want to stay here. They and their agent can ask for whatever they want, Dallas doesn't have to pay it. Negotiate. Let the free market decide what they are worth and go there. I believe in capitalism and the free market, but there is nothing free about it. You get what you pay for, and you won't find premier and quality items at Dollar General.

 

[SwagSurfer]

No NFL player should take less. You're 1 injury away from never lacing them up again.

 

[KingCorcoran]

Players should take *player* friendly deals.
There are great advantages to being a Cowboy. Jerry should make it clear he expects players to factor those advantages into contract negotiations, and if they don't, they'll be playing elsewhere.

No state income tax, better endorsement deals, better post career opportunities. Jerry brings that to the table with every deal.

So Cowboy players should have discounted contracts *relative to the league*, because relative to the league, Jerry brings a lot more to the table.

But one player, even a QB, taking a discount with the intent to improve the team is just a loser proposition. Even if a QB takes a 50% discount, that only improves the cap 10%.

A core of players would have to get together and say they're willing to take a discount. But the problem is they all think they're worth more than they are anyway. I don't see any way to make that work on *new* contracts. Everyone will feel like a chump because they feel they're giving up more than the other guys.

Maybe a bunch of guys could agree to cut their *existing* contracts, but that's not even conceivable unless that core feels they can "push the team over the top" with that discount.

What are these advantages you claim Cowboys players get that player on the other 31 teams don’t get? This is a myth. Being a member of the Dallas Cowboys is no more beneficial than being a member of any other team. Cowboys fans have deluded themselves. Falcons, Cardinals, Cowboys, Titans…it is all the same from the players’ perspective. Stop with these idiot notions that you get something extra outside your player contract by signing with the Cowboys. Good Lord there is no limit to what Cowboys fans will create in their imagination.