News: Why the exclusive tag and not the non-exclusive tag on Dak?

TheSkaven said:

OK. So you’re saying that they don’t believe it is worth the risk, and that the two 1’s they’d get in that case wouldn’t be enough compensation.

If that’s the case then I flat out disagree with the organization. I’m good with Dak as my QB1 for the right price. But there’s almost no one on this team, no let me fix that, there is no one on this team right now that I wouldn’t trade for two 1’s, especially if one of them is a high 1.

Click to expand...

Cowboy Lover said:

Just because YOU say "cue" doesn't mean that isn't exactly what happened.

What player from Tony's offense went to another team and succeeded as much as at Dallas?

That's what I thought.

Not "looking back Dak-hater"....just keeping things real. Thanks.

Click to expand...

TheSkaven said:

Now you have picks #17, #23 and the Pats’ first pick in 2021. According to Jimmy Johnson’s draft pick value chart, that’s 950 (#17), 760 (#23) and 350 (next year’s pick) = 2,060. That gets you up to the #3 pick overall, which means any QB except Burrow.

That’s not much of a downside.

Click to expand...

blindzebra said:

Nope, I just have a low tolerance for stupidity.

Click to expand...

SSoup said:

There's a tremendous downside. Replacing Dak with someone we'll then spend years trying to coax Dak-level play out of is a huge step backwards.

If we keep Dak and we keep and use our 1st rounder on a player to improve the team, we should get better.

If we give up Dak and 3 1st rounders (our 2020 pick plus the two picks the other team sends us) for a QB unlikely to be as good as him, we get appreciably worse because we go backwards at QB and we cost ourselves that other 1st rounder we'd have used to make the team better (and affordably so) around Dak.

(Also: maybe I read your post too fast but I'm not sure you made it clear which future pick we're giving up, exactly. Our own 2021 pick, or the Patriots' 2021 pick? Because I think we all know which of those two picks our trading partner will demand. They'll want the pick of an 8-8 team suffering a self-inflicted wound choosing to weaken themselves at QB. As opposed to the pick of a Belichick-coached winning team that will still have a franchise QB. So, to be clear, we're probably giving them a top ten 2021 pick instead of a pick down in the 20's. So the price just got much steeper. Fun! Future picks are valued a round lower than the present ones, so you just had us treat a top 10 pick as if it had the value of a 2nd rounder in a trade. Let's all pause and let the wisdom of that move wash over us for a moment.)

At that point, you're asking the money we save ourselves on Dak's contract to make up for losing a franchise QB and an additional 1st round caliber player. That's a lot to expect from that money.

Don't forget that a portion of the financial savings is negated by the loss of the extra 1st rounder (pick #17), which should've given us a 1st round caliber player we would then pay rookie wages for years. Every pick you spend on a quality player is financial relief. Giving up our best shot at picking a great, cheap player is us willingly giving back a chunk of the financial relief we would enjoy by sparing ourselves Dak's contract. (And, oh by the way, if we hedge our bet and the rookie gets paired with a free agent veteran QB making high-7 or low-8 figures, that's another huge dent we're making in the relief that weaseling our way out of paying Dak what he costs was supposed to give us. Fun!)

And even after all that, it has to be said: the cosmetic trait about Dak that causes so many of our fans' irrational aversion to him? Depending on which rookie we draft, decent chance that rookie comes with the same fundamental trait that causes the deal-breaking inner discomfort for those people. So, we're back to square one with a QB a massive chunk of our terrible fanbase will never be able to stomach. And who, in all likelihood, Jerry will never truly feel comfortable paying the money it takes to keep if we luck out like we did in 2016 and he turns out to be good.

Click to expand...

SSoup said:

There's a tremendous downside. Replacing Dak with someone we'll then spend years trying to coax Dak-level play out of is a huge step backwards.

If we keep Dak and we keep and use our 1st rounder on a player to improve the team, we should get better.

If we give up Dak and 3 1st rounders (our 2020 pick plus the two picks the other team sends us) for a QB unlikely to be as good as him, we get appreciably worse because we go backwards at QB and we cost ourselves that other 1st rounder we'd have used to make the team better (and affordably so) around Dak.

(Also: maybe I read your post too fast but I'm not sure you made it clear which future pick we're giving up, exactly. Our own 2021 pick, or the Patriots' 2021 pick? Because I think we all know which of those two picks our trading partner will demand. They'll want the pick of an 8-8 team suffering a self-inflicted wound choosing to weaken themselves at QB. As opposed to the pick of a Belichick-coached winning team that will still have a franchise QB. So, to be clear, we're probably giving them a top ten 2021 pick instead of a pick down in the 20's. So the price just got much steeper. Fun! Future picks are valued a round lower than the present ones, so you just had us treat a top 10 pick as if it had the value of a 2nd rounder in a trade. Let's all pause and let the wisdom of that move wash over us for a moment.)

At that point, you're asking the money we save ourselves on Dak's contract to make up for losing a franchise QB and an additional 1st round caliber player. That's a lot to expect from that money.

Don't forget that a portion of the financial savings is negated by the loss of the extra 1st rounder (pick #17), which should've given us a 1st round caliber player we would then pay rookie wages for years. Every pick you spend on a quality player is financial relief. Giving up our best shot at picking a great, cheap player is us willingly giving back a chunk of the financial relief we would enjoy by sparing ourselves Dak's contract. (And, oh by the way, if we hedge our bet and the rookie gets paired with a free agent veteran QB making high-7 or low-8 figures, that's another huge dent we're making in the relief that weaseling our way out of paying Dak what he costs was supposed to give us. Fun!)

And even after all that, it has to be said: the cosmetic trait about Dak that causes so many of our fans' irrational aversion to him? Depending on which rookie we draft, decent chance that rookie comes with the same fundamental trait that causes the deal-breaking inner discomfort for those people. So, we're back to square one with a QB a massive chunk of our terrible fanbase will never be able to stomach. And who, in all likelihood, Jerry will never truly feel comfortable paying the money it takes to keep if we luck out like we did in 2016 and he turns out to be good.

Click to expand...

blindzebra said:

Barber, Jones, Murray, Dez, TO, Austin, Witten in his prime, multiple OL that made the pro bowl, good special teams.

That is keeping it real.

Click to expand...

morat1959 said:

No team is giving up 2 first for Dak.

Click to expand...

America's Cowboy said:

You should have said that to your idol whose picture you use as your avatar.

Don't be a hypocrite. It doesn't look good.

Click to expand...

blindzebra said:

Yeah because Parcells was wrong, QBs grow on trees. You do not trade away a proven, winning QB, who is durable, and coming off his best year. It is like you guys slept through the years between Aikman and Romo.

Click to expand...

morat1959 said:

No team is giving up 2 first for Dak.

Click to expand...

GimmeTheBall! said:

We would!

Click to expand...

TheSkaven said:

What you are missing is that nearly all of the teams that need a quarterback are bad teams with high draft picks.

Here is the list of teams that legit need a starting quarterback in 2020:

Bengals (#1)
Lions (#3)
Dolphins (#5)
Chargers (#6)
Raiders (#12 and #18)
Colts (#13)
Buccaneers (#14)
Patriots (#23) - if they don’t resign Brady

So the worst case is the Pats, but giving up two firsts for a quarterback doesn’t seem like something in Belichick’s playbook.

But let’s say that he does do it. Now you have picks #17, #23 and the Pats’ first pick in 2021. According to Jimmy Johnson’s draft pick value chart, that’s 950 (#17), 760 (#23) and 350 (next year’s pick) = 2,060. That gets you up to the #3 pick overall, which means any QB except Burrow.

That’s not much of a downside.

Click to expand...

TheSkaven said:

Fish brings up the topic in his latest column, but doesn’t provide any answers. What say you, Cowboys Zoners?

https://www.si.com/nfl/cowboys/news...-exclusive-tag-for-dak-prescott-at-33-million

Given the gap (allegedly - we don’t know) in where both sides stand, this looks like it’s going to a franchise tag later this month.

Does anyone really think that another team would give up two 1’s for Dak Prescott? The difference between the two tags is $6M, not chump change, that’s a good player who could make a difference.

And so what if a team does sign him? Two first round picks is plenty of ammo to package and move up and get one of the stud QBs coming out of this draft.

Am I crazy here? Why would they put the more expensive tag on him?

Click to expand...

shabazz said:

and since there is no Free Agency, Trades or an upcoming Draft, we should just settle for paying Dakota 35-40 Million and like it........I hate having no options

Click to expand...

blindzebra said:

It is really simple.
They offered 33, 6 years, 90 guaranteed.
The length and the 20 million less than what Goff got in guaranteed money is why the offer was not taken. The tag is 33, what they offered, their offer was already lowballing him based on what Wentz and Goff got, to put the lower tag would just be another slap in the face. They caved to Zeke when he had 2 years left on his deal. Zeke who has had off field issues, got suspended, and then held out. Dak played 4 years for nothing, has 40 wins, 2 division titles, did not hold out, and kept the contract from being a distraction, had his best statistical year, and played hurt the last month of the season.

The lack of respect the fans and the Jones' are showing him is pathetic.

Click to expand...