Video: Dak doesn’t deserve long term deal until SB win

cowboygo said:

Its easy to pick a number now knowing what Goff & Wentz received. But if we initially offered 30M, I'd say offering 33.5M would be sweetening it. Essentially giving Goff's contract before Goff signed his.

Click to expand...

ABQCOWBOY said:

I see. And what if Dak's camp would have said no to that?

Click to expand...

ksg811 said:

Then you go to $34 million, which is still less than his current demands in total value while using his in place $2m deal to average down the contract for cap flexibility. "Overpaying" on an extension is better than waiting a year for "market" value, especially when extending a 4th round rookie contract.

Click to expand...

cowboygo said:

Exactly, we gave Romo his first big contract after starting 17 games in October of 2007, during a successful season. We had too many opportunities to sign him to an extension, and now the FO is up against a wall because we used the franchise tag.

Click to expand...

JoeKing said:

Dak deserved a better contract after his rookie season. The Jones boys messed up when that did not happen. Making him stick to that 4th rounder deal for 4 years sent a message to Dak that has him squeezing every penny he can get out of his current negotiations. The Jones boys created this mess.

Click to expand...

ABQCOWBOY said:

I see. So you basically pay him as the highest paid player in the NFL, regardless of what the price tag was? Keep in mind, the offer of 30, at the time, would have made him the second highest paid player in the NFL. The offer of 27, which was the original offer according to reports, would have made him the second highest, along with Garoppolo. So you believe that the Cowboys should have paid him 34 or whatever it took to get him to sign an extension? Is that essentially accurate?

Click to expand...

ksg811 said:

Pretty much, yeah, so long as it's within reason. If you're dead set on re-signing a guy, especially at the QB position, it is in your best interest to get it done as soon as possible. The QB market resets every year and not incrementally. Jimmy Garropolo signed the richest deal in history just 2 offseason ago. He's now 10th with #1 (Russel Wilson) resetting the market by 27% just 14 months later. What might be viewed as an overpay today, will be savings in just a year with even bigger savings when considering accrual based cap accounting, which is what matters most.

Click to expand...

ABQCOWBOY said:

Well I mean, that's the problem. That's what I am asking you. What is, within reason? Think about what you are suggesting here. You are suggesting that in 2018, the Cowboys should have offered numbers that are, right now today, the top salaries in the game. The cap had not yet gone up, the percentage of total cap that contract would represent would be about 20% of your total cap space. You have DLaw, you have Zeke, you have multiple young important FAs that are or will be coming due and you want to spend that kind of money on Dak, which BTW, because he is not a high first round pick with a 5th year option, brings nothing in the way of salary to off set the numbers you are suggesting. Unlike Wentz or Goff or any of these other QBs everybody brings up, who had existing contracts that got extended, Dak's deal is all cap that will have to be accounted for the hard way. No advantage, no benefit to the team in terms of cap relief.

So 2018, if we offer that deal and Dak takes it, do you see him agreeing to a 5 year deal? I don't. I see a 3 or 4 year deal being accepted, so we would be back at the table after this season, trying to get him resigned before he becomes an FA in 2021. We would be negotiating an even more expensive deal because we would have agreed to a 34 mil deal in 2018, which would have raised the bar even more and we would now be looking at paying him even more next year.

So lets go back to your post where you say:

"What might be viewed as an overpay today, will be savings in just a year with even bigger savings when considering accrual based cap accounting, which is what matters most."

How do you see any of that savings happen if you pay him 34 or whatever in 2018? How does the team realize any savings, based on what we know about Dak and CAA and how they work and what likely would have happened? I don't see any opportunity to see cap relief. All I see is a situation where we would end up paying a whole lot of money, getting no relief and losing even more talent because of the situation we would have put ourselves in.

Click to expand...

ABQCOWBOY said:

I see. So you basically pay him as the highest paid player in the NFL, regardless of what the price tag was? Keep in mind, the offer of 30, at the time, would have made him the second highest paid player in the NFL. The offer of 27, which was the original offer according to reports, would have made him the second highest, along with Garoppolo. So you believe that the Cowboys should have paid him 34 or whatever it took to get him to sign an extension? Is that essentially accurate?

Click to expand...

ksg811 said:

Dak wasn't eligible for an extension in 2018. Not really sure why you're even suggesting going back to 2018 in the first place. This would have been last year, with Lawrence, Zeke, and Jaylon Smith all signed to long term deals so there was no worry of how to afford them because they were all set.

The savings would have come over the life of the deal. Let's just say they signed him to the deal he reportedly wants now, which is 4 years and $140 million dollars at $35m AAV. If that same contract is signed last year instead, when combined with the $2 million he had left on his rookie deal creates a 5 year $142 million deal, or $28.4 million AAV for cap purposes. While yes, it would have increased his cap hit last year, it would have created flexibility over the remaining life of he contract. They could have signed him at a first year cap hit as low as 6 or 7 million, only a few million more than what he accounted for.

They rolled over nearly $20 million in cap space into this offseason, most of which was already earmarked for Dak either on the tag or a long term deal. They would have had options to either front-load Dak a little more to create even more future cap flexibility or use that remaining space to improve the team as they saw fit with the knowledge and comfort of having their big money QB already on the books.

Click to expand...

cowboygo said:

Getting ahead of Goff's contract correct, yes. At the time of signing, highest paid guarantee for a quarterback. Not highest paid player in the NFL. Goff is now currently the #4 QB in average salary. This contract was signed September, 2019. If we got Dak signed before Goff signed his, Goff would most likely have bumped Dak to #5 in average salary, and trumped his guarantees.

Click to expand...

ABQCOWBOY said:

But again, how does that help the team? The team ends up spending more money, over the long term. I don't see it.

Click to expand...

cowboygo said:

Its the best option available while we have the O-Line playing at a high level for the next several years. I don't want to nurse a rookie right now with this roster. What is your alternative? Was it signing a vet QB this offseason? Dalton is only cheap because he signed as a backup.

Click to expand...

Yoshimitsu said:

So while everyone else gets paid Dak has to win a superbowl to get a new contract?. This offseason needs to end so the subject can change.

Click to expand...

shabazz said:

https://encrypted-tbn0.***NOT-ALLOWED***/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcSjIiu43LI1UYI6f6Usap0TFpvYv9qA7Tp2QlYkbth9DJS4wXLx&usqp=CAU

Click to expand...

DeathMonkey said:

Wrong. He was drafted in the 4th. That's because his on-the-field play on top of the DUI. It's his own fault. Should he have been signed last season? Probably. Right after his rookie year? No. Definitely not.

Click to expand...