Garrett comment on Tank

[OmerV]

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PresDa01/gamelog/2017/

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PresDa01/gamelog/2018/

I expect more than 200 yards passing for my $25 million.

He averaged 242 last year. I'm not convinced Dak is the right guy, but he did average well above 200 yards.

 

[OmerV]

Then Tank Lawrence is the "second-winningest DE in regular season games last 3 years" too, pay him first!

The reality is, like it or not, fair or not, QBs are judged differently than other positions.

 

[Stash]

He averaged 242 last year. I'm not convinced Dak is the right guy, but he did average well above 200 yards.

Thank YOU Amari Cooper!

Pre-trade, the "$25 million man" averaged 202 yards a game.

Even so, are those "242 yards" a game worth $25 million a year to you?

 

[Stash]

The reality is, like it or not, fair or not, QBs are judged differently than other positions.

I'll choose "not" then, thanks.

Not to make the same mistakes teams like the Lions, Raiders, and Vikings made.
Not to overpay a good quarterback great money and capping myself out.
Not rush to overpay when I don't have to.
Not pay a guy more than what the actual superstar quarterbacks like Brady and Brees are making. Guys that actually carry their respective teams.

Yeah, I choose "not", thanks.

 

[erod]

That’s the most ridiculous notion I’ve heard about distribution of funds. Not everyone who’s less fortunate are uneducated fools.

90% of the wealth is controlled by 10% who inherit or marry into it.

That's nonsense. And this is widely held theory among scholars. Not my making.

And millionaires are made constantly in America out of people who started with almost nothing. There are people who make money, and people who spend money. Far more of the latter than the former.

Why is just about every lottery winner broke within 5 years? Why do pro athletes go broke at an incredibly high rate in almost no time?

People just don't understand money in general. I've watched countless friends and family members piss away money on the dumbest crap. I know a guy that won a six-figure settlement from a work injury. He bought a Hummer, then put a $20,000 aquarium in his house. He was check-to-check about six months later.

 

[OmerV]

Thank YOU Amari Cooper!

Pre-trade, the "$25 million man" averaged 202 yards a game.

Even so, are those "242 yards" a game worth $25 million a year to you?

Without a doubt Cooper was a big part of that, but Dak isn't the only QB that needs quality receivers. As for the 242, the yardage is fine if coupled with a strong running game. In the absence of a strong running game he would throw more, and get more yardage, but efficiency would almost certainly drop. That would be my worry if the running game wasn't there more than they yardage total.

 

[Stash]

Without a doubt Cooper was a big part of that, but Dak isn't the only QB that needs quality receivers. As for the 242, the yardage is fine if coupled with a strong running game. In the absence of a strong running game he would throw more, and get more yardage, but efficiency would almost certainly drop. That would be my worry if the running game wasn't there more than they yardage total.

That goes to my point, you don't pay $25 million a year for "fine".

 

[OmerV]

I'll choose "not" then, thanks.

Not to make the same mistakes teams like the Lions, Raiders, and Vikings made.
Not to overpay a good quarterback great money and capping myself out.
Not rush to overpay when I don't have to.
Not pay a guy more than what the actual superstar quarterbacks like Brady and Brees are making. Guys that actually carry their respective teams.

Yeah, I choose "not", thanks.

The Lions, Raiders and Vikings paid big for QBs that weren't winning. Carr was somewhat the exception in that he had one winning season the year before signing his big contract, but that was the only one of his career. In 3 years Dak has 3 playoff games, whereas Carr, Cousins and Stafford combined have only 4 playoff games in a collective 22 years.

Again, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I'm all in on Dak, just saying we need to be fair about how he is characterized.

 

[OmerV]

That goes to my point, you don't pay $25 million a year for "fine".

That's not what I meant, and I suspect you know that. I didn't mean "fine" as in "average" or "okay", I meant fine as in good enough to win at the NFL level. In other words, 242 yards and not turning the ball over easily gets the job done in an offense with a strong running game.

The team is getting to the playoffs with Dak, and the playoff losses have not been due to a lack of passing yards, or a lack of offense. Dak has averaged 265 yards per game in the playoffs, and the team has averaged 372 yards in the playoffs.

Again, my concern is how would the team do if the running game wasn't there, and if that were the case, the yardage wouldn't be the problem - Dak's yardage totals would go up with the greater number of throws - but the efficiency would go down. That's the concern if the running game weren't there - the efficiency.

 

[Stash]

The Lions, Raiders and Vikings paid big for QBs that weren't winning. Carr was somewhat the exception in that he had one winning season the year before signing his big contract, but that was the only one of his career. In 3 years Dak has 3 playoff games, whereas Carr, Cousins and Stafford combined have only 4 playoff games in a collective 22 years.

Again, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I'm all in on Dak, just saying we need to be fair about how he is characterized.

And you think it's "fair" to attribute "winning" to the quarterback individually? Sorry, but I don't think it's "fair" to "categorize" him based on that at all. Plenty if undeserving quarterbacks won and won it all because their teams carried THEM, and not the other way around.

And when a team wins and their quarterback throws for 200 yards? They won DESPITE HIM, NOT BECAUSE OF HIM.

 

[Stash]

That's not what I meant, and I suspect you know that. I didn't mean "fine" as in "average" or "okay", I meant fine as in good enough to win at the NFL level. In other words, 242 yards and not turning the ball over easily gets the job done in an offense with a strong running game.

The team is getting to the playoffs with Dak, and the playoff losses have not been due to a lack of passing yards, or a lack of offense. Dak has averaged 265 yards per game in the playoffs, and the team has averaged 372 yards in the playoffs.

Again, my concern is how would the team do if the running game wasn't there, and if that were the case, the yardage wouldn't be the problem - Dak's yardage totals would go up with the greater number of throws - but the efficiency would go down. That's the concern if the running game weren't there - the efficiency.

Prescott, and the entire offense, cratered when Elliott missed those 6 games in 2017, I showed that in my gamelog links. That's documented. They and Dak, set franchise record lows for points scored.

We've seen it, and it's a legitimate concern. And not something you simply throw $25 million a year at.

 

[OmerV]

And you think it's "fair" to attribute "winning" to the quarterback individually? Sorry, but I don't think it's "fair" to "categorize" him based on that at all. Plenty if undeserving quarterbacks won and won it all because their teams carried THEM, and not the other way around.

And when a team wins and their quarterback throws for 200 yards? They won DESPITE HIM, NOT BECAUSE OF HIM.

All I said was winning is a measure teams use, and that your argument against that was based on the examples of QBs that weren't winning.

I will say that winning is one of the criteria I would use if it were me making the decision, but it wouldn't at all be the sole measure. It would be one of many things I look at.

I will also say looking at yardage totals is no better a measure than wins because it ignores how the offense functions, and how what the QB fits into that. A prime example of that is Troy Aikman. His yardage and TD totals were always very ordinary - never close to being among the top QB's, but what he did within the offense was invaluable.

Before you say it, I am not saying Dak is the same level of QB Aikman was, I was merely pointing out that yardage totals are just another element to look at, and not worthy of as much importance as you are giving it.

 

[Stash]

All I said was winning is a measure teams use, and that your argument against that was based on the examples of QBs that weren't winning.

I will say that winning is one of the criteria I would use if it were me making the decision, but it wouldn't at all be the sole measure. It would be one of many things I look at.

I will also say looking at yardage totals is no better a measure than wins because it ignores how the offense functions, and how what the QB fits into that. A prime example of that is Troy Aikman. His yardage and TD totals were always very ordinary - never close to being among the top QB's, but what he did within the offense was invaluable.

Before you say it, I am not saying Dak is the same level of QB Aikman was, I was merely pointing out that yardage totals are just another element to look at, and not worthy of as much importance as you are giving it.

It's a far better indicator of the quarterbacks individual performance than "team wins". Which is intentionally misleading.

 

[TheStarInFLA]

If you can't live on 20M per year maybe taking some finacial and accounting classes might be a wise investment.

For all of the back and forth on paying Lawrence, the last thing I want to see these clowns do now I see to rush to pay Dak Prescott big money.

Don't talk about how your best, most proven defensive player needs to take one for the team and then rush to overpay a quarterback too much too soon.

If they do that crap? I'll root for them to fail.

Yeah I hope Garrett and the Joneses were using this very public contract negotiation to really be speaking to Dak.

 

[Stash]

Yeah I hope Garrett and the Joneses were using this very public contract negotiation to really be speaking to Dak.

Same here. I hope they tell Dak and his agent that unless it's about $20 million a year, I'll play it out.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

The Angels just gave a guy a half a billion dollars. Which top the third of a billion Philly gave to a guy.

Aaron Rodgers was given more money than Lambeau Field is worth.

LeBron makes more than the entire Bulls roster did in the 90s.

Messi makes more than $100 million per season.

Pro sports has jumped the shark.

Stop watching?

This clearly pains you.

Also it's not like this money is coming out of nowhere. The players are getting a portion of the money that is earned through their participation.

When the product suffers so too will revenues and contracts will come down as well. That's how capitalism works.

 

[Diehardblues]

That's nonsense. And this is widely held theory among scholars. Not my making.

And millionaires are made constantly in America out of people who started with almost nothing. There are people who make money, and people who spend money. Far more of the latter than the former.

Why is just about every lottery winner broke within 5 years? Why do pro athletes go broke at an incredibly high rate in almost no time?

People just don't understand money in general. I've watched countless friends and family members piss away money on the dumbest crap. I know a guy that won a six-figure settlement from a work injury. He bought a Hummer, then put a $20,000 aquarium in his house. He was check-to-check about six months later.

90% of the world's wealth is held by 10% of the population. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth

That said there is much truth to those who suddenly coming into money not knowing how to manage it. Especially those like athletes from impoverished backgrounds. But your 95% is quite an insult to most of the population. There is much of the educated population who could manage but simply hadn’t had the opportunity.

 

[G2]

Opinions vary but the fact is if you look at the contracts of others, age of contract and quality of player that is about where he fits in the slot

Who make 20 Mil?

 

[TwentyOne]

Athletes aren’t the only segment of the entertainment business which are grossly overpaid.

It hasn’t always been the case. But television revenue has changed the dynamics in professional and the people have fed with their viewership. As a result the funds are available and the owning parts more than willling to pay.

I know how it works. And you can rationalize all the things that happen. You can look for guilty parties/ones or who are responsible for it. But that isnt where we have to start when you think about the problem.

Humans are not bad or good. They just adjust to their surrounding. If the surrounding rewards greediness then people will get greedy. So you will get a greedy society. If the surrounding rewards being asocial then people will become egomanic. And you will get a asocial society.

It is always the question first: what are the values we want to let define our society. Then you implement a system that rewards people for following those values.

This is a systemic problem we have not one of the people living in it. People just trying to survive. Make a living. There is nothing wrong with that.

Free market, deregulation and privatisation are one of the worst things in modern time.

 

[OmerV]

It's a far better indicator of the quarterbacks individual performance than "team wins". Which is intentionally misleading.

It really isn't. Is 300 yards better than 242 if the player with 300 yards thows 2-3 INTs and the player with 242 throws 0-1 INTs? You are looking for a simple, one stop measuring stick, and there just isn't one. The whole picture has to be looked at.

One other point to take note of is the guys that you called "mistakes" (Cousins, Stafford and Carr) were signed more on yardage than winning, so your own example is working against your argument.