Twitter: Werder: Dak will be NFL's highest-paid player

ultron · Mar 26, 2020

rocyaice said:
What were the years though?

Not sure, they never said - but Wentz and Goff both signed almost identical deals and their deals were for 4 years.

phildadon86 · Mar 26, 2020

Swagger said:
In my view the O-Line was at it's strongest in 2016. It was sensational and Prescott wasn't asked to win games. just not to lose them.

So when he went into Lambeau and Pittsburgh and won when we apparently had no chance. It was all the team. How about New Orleans in 2018? Guess the team only factors into wins and losses are all on Dak. Gotcha

Kingofholland · Mar 26, 2020

The Cowboys must have done something to piss him off lol.

Corso · Mar 26, 2020

ultron said:
Not sure, they never said - but Wentz and Goff both signed almost identical deals and their deals were for 4 years.

That just made me think:
Dak's team has probably been asking for specifically 3 years at very high money with full guarantees.

dagreat1_87 · Mar 26, 2020

who cares if he's the highest paid? Swear you guys act like its your money is getting spent. Like many have said in a few years he'll be lucky to be even top 5...Plus if he actually wins a superbowl, i doubt anyone here will be caring what his salary is.

Philmonroe · Mar 26, 2020

cowboyec said:
bull.

Nope the actual truth that all y'all Pro Dak people will find out sooner or later. Y'all just used to that honda accord life at QB with Dak. Once you get a taste of a Bentley type QB you'll see and know the difference real quick.

Philmonroe · Mar 26, 2020

dagreat1_87 said:
who cares if he's the highest paid? Swear you guys act like its your money is getting spent. Like many have said in a few years he'll be lucky to be even top 5...Plus if he actually wins a superbowl, i doubt anyone here will be caring what his salary is.

Spare us the super groupie logic on top of the fact he won't be the reason we win a Super Bowl

UpNorth · Mar 26, 2020

This is the tipping point for a very long of run of disappointment and eventual rebuild

We couldn't win with elite talent all around him while he was making nothing .

This is a dark moment in franchise history

The fact that rival fans everywhere are laughing their ***** off and openly celebrating this blunder should speak volumes

Swagger · Mar 26, 2020

Corso said:
I think it's the lack of TO's.
And I think it goes back to Romo.
He had the propensity to throw that heartbreaking pick at the worst time and peeps remember that.
Dak comes in and he's seemingly less TO prone and fans appreciated it.

Durability is one thing too, but I think it's appreciating a player who plays not to lose vs a player who played to win, but it sometimes backfired.

That's fair.

In his early days I can understand that as Romo certainly made some boneheaded plays plus throw in the Seattle bobbled snap debacle - although if the kicker had blocked even 1% then he would have made the end zone!

In his (Romo) latter years, when he wasn't asked to do too much, he was excellent and rarely turned the ball over.

So with Prescott it's Mr percentage, doesn't turn the ball over (easier to do that when you have a very good/excellent O-Line and strong running game - just saying) and he's solid. Sure and I don't disagree with that.

But could you not get all of that from a high drafted rookie or a solid vet QB at a fraction of the price?

Another worry of mine re: Prescott is that we won't rely on the running game. We have seen over the past 4 years that running the ball is when the offense and the team rocks and rolls. As a result only using Prescott to throw for 220-250 yards and 1-2 touchdowns. He can do that, he has done in that in the past, but when you pay $35 million for that...it's very, very difficult to build a roster around him strong enough to actually win a Superbowl. Also, given that type of salary there will be a propensity to put the ball in Prescott's hands to win games. We saw how that worked last season...

Corso · Mar 26, 2020

Swagger said:
That's fair.

In his early days I can understand that as Romo certainly made some boneheaded plays plus throw in the Seattle bobbled snap debacle - although if the kicker had blocked even 1% then he would have made the end zone!

In his (Romo) latter years, when he wasn't asked to do too much, he was excellent and rarely turned the ball over.

So with Prescott it's Mr percentage, doesn't turn the ball over (easier to do that when you have a very good/excellent O-Line and strong running game - just saying) and he's solid. Sure and I don't disagree with that.

But could you not get all of that from a high drafted rookie or a solid vet QB at a fraction of the price?

Another worry of mine re: Prescott is that we won't rely on the running game. We have seen over the past 4 years that running the ball is when the offense and the team rocks and rolls. As a result only using Prescott to throw for 220-250 yards and 1-2 touchdowns. He can do that, he has done in that in the past, but when you pay $35 million for that...it's very, very difficult to build a roster around him strong enough to actually win a Superbowl. Also, given that type of salary there will be a propensity to put the ball in Prescott's hands to win games. We saw how that worked last season...

I savvy.

Future · Mar 26, 2020

dagreat1_87 said:
who cares if he's the highest paid? Swear you guys act like its your money is getting spent. Like many have said in a few years he'll be lucky to be even top 5...Plus if he actually wins a superbowl, i doubt anyone here will be caring what his salary is.

Yes. Much of the criticism of contracts - Zeke, DLaw, Dak - is just grown man jealous of another man's money. That's all it is.

If they win a Super Bowl, the same crowd will be saying that it's despite Dak and his contract.

WeDemBoyz · Mar 26, 2020

phildadon86 said:
So then who got us to 13-3? I’m just curious

The team... backed by a good bus driver QB.

I'm actually a big Dak fan. I wanted him to succeed when there were many doubters. But for the amount that he's asking for, I have to start to think about what's really best for the team.

If I can get a boatload of picks, money to build up the strength of the rest of the team and a bus driver QB, then I think it's worth the exploration.

Once teams give their QBs big pay days, it's incredibly hard for them to continue their success.

DIAF · Mar 26, 2020

jnday said:
He won’t and neither will the rest of us. We don’t have no worries , because overpaying Dak will lead to years of bad football teams. We are getting a taste of the players that will be lost in Quinn and Jones. It will only get worse from here.

The flipside of that is you keep players like Quinn and Jones, and you are starting the likes of Case Keenum at QB unless you get lucky in the draft and hit on a guy, but you'd probably have to be awful enough to draft in the top 5 to get him.

No thank you, I'd rather pay Dak.

Do some of you not remember the early 00s, spending YEARS looking for a starting QB that was even just MEDIOCRE? I certainly do not wish to return to those days.

Swagger · Mar 26, 2020

phildadon86 said:
So when he went into Lambeau and Pittsburgh and won when we apparently had no chance. It was all the team. How about New Orleans in 2018? Guess the team only factors into wins and losses are all on Dak. Gotcha

Elliott running for a combined 270 yards, averaging around 5.5 yards a carry versus the Pack and Pittsburgh was central to winning those game. Not just the yards but in turn opening up regulation throws to uncovered guys. I give Prescott credit for the very good throw to Dez in the Steelers game but he didn't carry the side in either game. That was on the O-Line and Elliott. Prescott just had to drive the bus and he did that very well.

You prove my point re the Saints game. That's exactly the type of game we need from a QB (although we could do with a little more as the offense only scored 13 points). 249 yards and 1 touchdown. Steady Eddie from Prescott. Dalton could produce that type of performance. From memory I'm pretty sure that our defense played out of their MINDS that night. That win was on the defense. Prescott didn't win the game but he didn't lose it - that's when he's in his element. But if you are paying a QB $35 million you want him to be able to win some games off his back to negate the 2-3 quality players you do not have in order to pay his salary.

mattjames2010 · Mar 26, 2020

DIAF said:
The flipside of that is you keep players like Quinn and Jones, and you are starting the likes of Case Keenum at QB unless you get lucky in the draft and hit on a guy, but you'd probably have to be awful enough to draft in the top 5 to get him.

No thank you, I'd rather pay Dak.

Do some of you not remember the early 00s, spending YEARS looking for a starting QB that was even just MEDIOCRE? I certainly do not wish to return to those days.

There were a literal 2 seasons from when Aikman retired to getting Romo. We had our QB, we were simply developing him.

DIAF · Mar 26, 2020

mattjames2010 said:
There were a literal 2 seasons from when Aikman retired to getting Romo. We had our QB, we were simply developing him.

Dude, Aikman was awful in 2000 and Tony Romo didn't step onto a field for us as an NFL starting QB until 2006. We had 5 seasons of sub-par QBing before Bledsoe made the position somewhat respectable in 2005.

No thanks to going back to those days.

yimyammer · Mar 26, 2020

Sydla said:
Think about this............. Jerry has negotiated three big contracts in the last two years.

In each one, he buckled and made that player the highest paid player in the league at that position per AAV (Lawrence, then Elliott, then Cooper).

And he's about to do it again here with Dak. Because he's a crappy negotiator and players and agents know he'll buckle.

When all is said and done, we'll probably be wasting $10MM of so of cap space each year because he overpaid each of these four players.

Over-paying is a core belief of his

mattjames2010 · Mar 26, 2020

DIAF said:
Dude, Aikman was awful in 2000 and Tony Romo didn't step onto a field for us as an NFL starting QB until 2006. We had 5 seasons of sub-par QBing before Bledsoe made the position somewhat respectable in 2005.

No thanks to going back to those days.

That doesn't change the fact that we found our QB in 2 years. Again, he was simply being developed. He probably could have started in 05. if I remember correctly, he looked great in training camp and the preseason.

tyke1doe · Mar 26, 2020

Sydla said:
I mean who isn't shocked by this. Jerry caves in almost every negotiation.

Folds like a well-used accordion.

starfan1 · Mar 26, 2020

DIAF said:
Dude, Aikman was awful in 2000 and Tony Romo didn't step onto a field for us as an NFL starting QB until 2006. We had 5 seasons of sub-par QBing before Bledsoe made the position somewhat respectable in 2005.

No thanks to going back to those days.

Romo was a train wreck until late in his career then his body gave way

Twitter: Werder: Dak will be NFL's highest-paid player

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Offseason mode... sleepy time

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Offseason mode... sleepy time

Intramural Legend

Member

DivaLover159

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

DivaLover159

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member