MysteryIceGuro
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 8,736
- Reaction score
- 15,698
I say we give Dak a 2 year contract. That way, we don't waste a tag, and he gets what he wants. A short contract so he can "cash" in on the next big market changing price.
However, we draft a QB either this year or next year to sit behind Dak just in case he's average again. We will treat him like the Chiefs did Alex Smith. He will get a chance, however, the rookie sitting under him will have his chance as well. If Dak fails to step up to the plate, we let him walk after his contract year, and play the rookie while we have one or two good years left out of Zeke and the O-line. We may have a Mahomes situation on our hands if we go with this method. Also, this should please the "Pro-Dakers" because they will no longer have a albeit terrible HC to blame. It's all on Dak now. He's going into his 5th year with a new HC. There is no room or reason for failure. If he fails, 2 years is enough time to reveal the truth of who he is.
Now, some will ask, "What if the rookie is a bust?". Well I will answer that question with a question. "What's the worst that could happen?"
Say we enter Dak's contract year and he has yet to reach the big game. The worst we could do with a rookie is we don't reach the big game.
Some will say, "We could go 0-16 with the rookie!" Tell me. What's the difference between 0-16 and 8-8 (let's say we miss the playoffs with 8-8)? You miss the playoffs either way. All it is is a difference in draft pick in the end. You aren't competing in the playoffs, you aren't competing for a superbowl, both seasons end at the 17th game. There is no difference besides a flashy record. Difference is, we have a lot more to build off of with the cheap rookie and 1st-2nd pick in the draft.
If 2 years is not substantial enough, I also saw this post in another thread
Tagging is not ideal, but it may not be all that bad.
Tl;dr: we need a rookie QB this year or next year. We can do it by either giving him a short contract or tagging him. If he refuses, we just need to get a rookie. I'm not interested in someone that holds out when that same person just went 8-8 with average play for the latter half of the season.
However, we draft a QB either this year or next year to sit behind Dak just in case he's average again. We will treat him like the Chiefs did Alex Smith. He will get a chance, however, the rookie sitting under him will have his chance as well. If Dak fails to step up to the plate, we let him walk after his contract year, and play the rookie while we have one or two good years left out of Zeke and the O-line. We may have a Mahomes situation on our hands if we go with this method. Also, this should please the "Pro-Dakers" because they will no longer have a albeit terrible HC to blame. It's all on Dak now. He's going into his 5th year with a new HC. There is no room or reason for failure. If he fails, 2 years is enough time to reveal the truth of who he is.
Now, some will ask, "What if the rookie is a bust?". Well I will answer that question with a question. "What's the worst that could happen?"
Say we enter Dak's contract year and he has yet to reach the big game. The worst we could do with a rookie is we don't reach the big game.
Some will say, "We could go 0-16 with the rookie!" Tell me. What's the difference between 0-16 and 8-8 (let's say we miss the playoffs with 8-8)? You miss the playoffs either way. All it is is a difference in draft pick in the end. You aren't competing in the playoffs, you aren't competing for a superbowl, both seasons end at the 17th game. There is no difference besides a flashy record. Difference is, we have a lot more to build off of with the cheap rookie and 1st-2nd pick in the draft.
If 2 years is not substantial enough, I also saw this post in another thread
Interesting thought here and it's neither for or against Prescott.
Given that we are half way through January, I do not think Prescott will be signed to a long term contract before the 2020 draft.
I concede that he might be signed on a franchise tag beforehand.
The reason being - imagine if Tua or Herbert drop to #17?
There must be a fair chance that we would take him.
Reason being...potential top draw QB on a rookie contract.
People will claim that we have other needs that need addressing with greater priority but it would gives the Cowboys loads of leverage at the QB position.
It would mean that Prescott would have a prove it or lose it season, the rookie would not be rushed in to the fold as Prescott would be playing.
If Prescott plays lights out then we can simply trade the rookie QB as there will always be a taker for a QB like Tua or Herbert.
If Prescott struggles and continues to regress then we can ship him out and bring in the rookie QB for the 2020/21 season.
If he plays ok then we can offer him a mid term deal and if he rejects then see you later.
This makes pragmatic and commercial sense to me and it's neither loving or hating on Prescott.
It simply forces his hand to either step up or get out.
Further, the last time Prescott had a quality QB on his shoulder (Romo) it brought out the best in him.
Tagging is not ideal, but it may not be all that bad.
Tl;dr: we need a rookie QB this year or next year. We can do it by either giving him a short contract or tagging him. If he refuses, we just need to get a rookie. I'm not interested in someone that holds out when that same person just went 8-8 with average play for the latter half of the season.