News: BR: Report: Cowboys Stunned by Dak Prescott's Stance on Length of New Contract

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,207
Reaction score
15,282
Dak wanted 3, dallas 6.

Both came down 1 year.

I dont see what Dak gains with his habits. He will play under the tag then demand another 4 year contract next year. So essentially he played for 5 years before he can get a third one. So what about all that fuzz....
he gets more guaranteed money. this year is now guaranteed .
if he signs 4 year deal next year he gets more guaranteed money.

Often players wind up with only the money that is guaranteed.
If he plays on 2nd tag, then even more guaranteed money.

Romo on his last contract, he didnt get all the money, just what was guaranteed. He got rest of that while he was working for cbs lol.
 

Sydla

Well-Known Member
Messages
59,689
Reaction score
91,134
Yep. Now Watson (and soon to be Mahomes) is seeking a 3 year deal.



AGAIN, the party that is being fairly unreasonable (not that unreasonable but still outside the norm) are the Cowboys. What Dak is asking/offering is perfectly in-line with what is peers are getting...4 year deals...Goff/Wentz: 4 year extensions...Tannehill, Brady, Bridgewater, Rivers, Brees, Cousins all got 4 year or less contracts.


Watson would then be under contract for 5 years. Not 4.

You guys continue to make apples and oranges comparisons. Rivers, Brees, etc. Those guys are on their 3rd, 4th contracts. They are a non-comparison to Dak.

The Cowboys are not being unreasonable. They are the reasonable party given Dak's peers and what they have gotten.
 

FVSTONE

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,548
Reaction score
2,644
Dak had a great rookie then the league went to school on him. He's feasted on the lesser teams while the teams with winning record have taken him out to the wood shed. Last year was so disappointing, HIS team was picked by numerous EXPERTS to go deep into the playoffs with some picking them to go all the way. Well 8-8 with great stats might sit well with some fans, but it doesn't sit well with me. Other than his first season I'm not jumping on the Dak bandwagon. He couldn't lead HIS team to victory against two double digit dogs. Both the AAA Eagles and New York Jets were just planning to show-up for the half time spread and ended up ruining a run at the playoffs because Dak once again cracked under pressure. Now he's it's all about the money to him, if it wasn't he'd sign a 5 year contract and get ready for this season. But no, Dak is already thinking about his next big score when he hasn't earned the one JJ's offering now. Fire your agents, setup a meeting with JJ and get something done.
 

Jfconrow

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,269
Reaction score
672
There has to be a hold up on something like guarantee, signing bonus etc.

Obviously if the 5th year was fully guaranteed Dak would not mind a 5th year....he certainly doesn’t want to only have 3 or 4 years guaranteed then open himself up to be cut year 5 or worse get franchised. So I’m guessing a Kurt cousins deal is not on the table for all 4 or 5 years. My guess is only 3 years fully guaranteed so 34m a year and 118M guaranteed.

So what’s he thinking? Do the short contract and then sign another one in 3 years because they won’t guarantee more then 3 years...I see his point those long contracts mean nothing without the guarantee. If he plays on the tag this year it’s +30m on top of a contract next year to a total of 148m. And if he’s tagged again it’s + 37m to 185m.....at that point it’s either another 118m deal: 303m! Or maybe he gets tagged some more and that still puts him somewhere 200/250m over 6 years (my math is prob a little off but if he can make it 1-2 more years without getting hurt he’ll have close to 200m guaranteed. Personally i wouldn’t step on the field without the first 4 year deal: fully guaranteed or at least 3 years.
 
Last edited:

Sevenup3000

Well-Known Member
Messages
874
Reaction score
923
Watson would then be under contract for 5 years. Not 4.

You guys continue to make apples and oranges comparisons. Rivers, Brees, etc. Those guys are on their 3rd, 4th contracts. They are a non-comparison to Dak.

The Cowboys are not being unreasonable. They are the reasonable party given Dak's peers and what they have gotten.

Watson is saying, I will give you 8 years of control before seeking my 3rd contract...Dak is saying I will give you 8 years of control before seeking my 3rd contract. I assume Mahomes will want the same. Watson/Mahomes may very well end up signing a deal that gives Houston/Kansas City 9 years of control before they can seek their 3rd contract like Wentz and Goff did...however that is largely driven by Wentz, Goff, Watson, Mahomes being bound by the 5th year team option...Dak is not.

So what is the downside of Dak's contract from Dallas point of view: they don't get an extra year of control...what is the upside to Dak's contract from Dallas point of view: they have paid Dak about $26 million dollars less than Wentz, Goff, Watson, and Mahomes.

So if you want Dak to give up that extra year (and give Dallas an extra year of control)...it SHOULD cost the Cowboys $26 million dollars. Give Dak an extra $26 million guarantee...and THEN Dak would truly be in line with his peers at the end of their second contracts.

Dak is not giving up a year of control for nothing. Dallas needs to pay for it...Dallas wants Dak to give up an extra year...for nothing...and Dak is RIGHTFULLY refusing. You gotta pay for it.
 

Sydla

Well-Known Member
Messages
59,689
Reaction score
91,134
Watson is saying, I will give you 8 years of control before seeking my 3rd contract...Dak is saying I will give you 8 years of control before seeking my 3rd contract. I assume Mahomes will want the same. Watson/Mahomes may very well end up signing a deal that gives Houston/Kansas City 9 years of control before they can seek their 3rd contract like Wentz and Goff did...however that is largely driven by Wentz, Goff, Watson, Mahomes being bound by the 5th year team option...Dak is not.

So what is the downside of Dak's contract from Dallas point of view: they don't get an extra year of control...what is the upside to Dak's contract from Dallas point of view: they have paid Dak about $26 million dollars less than Wentz, Goff, Watson, and Mahomes.

So if you want Dak to give up that extra year (and give Dallas an extra year of control)...it SHOULD cost the Cowboys $26 million dollars. Give Dak an extra $26 million guarantee...and THEN Dak would truly be in line with his peers at the end of their second contracts.

Dak is not giving up a year of control for nothing. Dallas needs to pay for it...Dallas wants Dak to give up an extra year...for nothing...and Dak is RIGHTFULLY refusing. You gotta pay for it.

8 years of control? Are you trying to count past years? Because that's kind of a silly way to look at it.

It's also not just about control. It's about being able to use additional years to work the cap, restructure, etc. You are focusing too much on control and missing the biggest reason Dallas would want a longer deal than a shorter one.

And no, Dak shouldn't get an extra $26MM guarantee on top of what his peers got in guarantees. So are you saying when Wentz signed and got potential total guarantees of $107M to be spread over 6 years, you are suggesting Dak should get $133MM in potential guarantees over 5 years?
 

dfense

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,030
Reaction score
6,461
Franchise him for 1 year and then sign him to 4.

1+4 =5 problem solved.
 

Sydla

Well-Known Member
Messages
59,689
Reaction score
91,134
Franchise him for 1 year and then sign him to 4.

1+4 =5 problem solved.

That doesn't solve the Cowboys issue.

People are focusing on this whole concept of control. It's not that Dallas wants "control" for 5 years. They want to be able to spread signing bonus money over 5 years instead of 4 as well as be able to restructure down the road if possible and shift cap hits into future years.
 

CouchCoach

Staff member
Messages
41,122
Reaction score
74,900
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
Franchise him for 1 year and then sign him to 4.

1+4 =5 problem solved.
Think his agent might have thought of that?

They're trying to mitigate the guarantee, the term relates more to that than the length of the contract.

We're already seeing QB's move down to a 3 year contract extension and as we know, they set the tone, the owners do not. Good luck with Prescott getting a 4 year deal next season, he won;t go beyond 3 unless they want to pay a hell of a lot for that 4th year and the next negotiation will be after Mahomes and Watson have their new deals. Prescott's agent is unlikely to agree to anything until those deals are done.

Used to be the players were the horses in the rodeo, that has reversed and the owners know they're getting ridden. What is not fair is criticizing Cowboys management for this, they did not create it. They created the cap situation with the other signings but not this QB situation. When Cousins got that 3 year 84M all guaranteed contract, the game changed and it's not going back.
 

CouchCoach

Staff member
Messages
41,122
Reaction score
74,900
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
That doesn't solve the Cowboys issue.

People are focusing on this whole concept of control. It's not that Dallas wants "control" for 5 years. They want to be able to spread signing bonus money over 5 years instead of 4 as well as be able to restructure down the road if possible and shift cap hits into future years.
And why do they, above all other teams, need to do that? Because they created their own problem with these other contracts. Now, after the horses are all out of the barn and the fox has eaten all the chickens, they wake up to the situation they created and it's not like they haven't been here before.
 

TwentyOne

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,585
Reaction score
4,246
he gets more guaranteed money. this year is now guaranteed .
if he signs 4 year deal next year he gets more guaranteed money.

Often players wind up with only the money that is guaranteed.
If he plays on 2nd tag, then even more guaranteed money.

Romo on his last contract, he didnt get all the money, just what was guaranteed. He got rest of that while he was working for cbs lol.

Its commonly undisputed that Dak wanted to get a shorter deal so he could be able to get a 3rd or even 4th contract in his career.
 

Sydla

Well-Known Member
Messages
59,689
Reaction score
91,134
And why do they, above all other teams, need to do that? Because they created their own problem with these other contracts. Now, after the horses are all out of the barn and the fox has eaten all the chickens, they wake up to the situation they created and it's not like they haven't been here before.

Nope.

They want to do that because that's how they do that with most of their players. Look at most of their big contracts.......... they are all longer term deals. And other teams do the exact same thing with young players. Again, Wentz and Goff signed deals that essentially gave their teams 6 years of workable cap years. You act like other teams don't so the same thing. That's wrong.

You are trying to make this out to be something it's not.
 

Sevenup3000

Well-Known Member
Messages
874
Reaction score
923
8 years of control? Are you trying to count past years? Because that's kind of a silly way to look at it.

It's also not just about control. It's about being able to use additional years to work the cap, restructure, etc. You are focusing too much on control and missing the biggest reason Dallas would want a longer deal than a shorter one.

And no, Dak shouldn't get an extra $26MM guarantee on top of what his peers got in guarantees. So are you saying when Wentz signed and got potential total guarantees of $107M to be spread over 6 years, you are suggesting Dak should get $133MM in potential guarantees over 5 years?

Oh no, I get why the Cowboys want more years because it makes their cap management a lot easier. I get that. But that sounds like a Dallas problem and not a Dak problem. Just like when Dak was the 77th highest paid QB in the NFL over the last 4 years...that was a Dak problem and not a Cowboys one. I don't remember the Cowboys going to Dak and saying, "man Dak, it is such a shame that you are being paid less in 4 years than Matt Stafford makes in 1 half of football...here let me help you out."

Dallas had 4 years to plan for Dak's new contract...plan accordingly...it is not incumbent on Dak to help managed Dallas' cap...ESPECIALLY not on his second (first real) contract.

And yes, if Dallas wants to TRULY treat Dak like Wentz and Goff, they owe him $26MM. So if Dallas wants Dak's contract to end in 2024 like Wentz and Goff...they can start by paying him an extra $26MM so that at the end of their second deals...Dak would have made about the same as them.

Simple.
 

jaythecowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,862
Reaction score
2,248
That doesn't solve the Cowboys issue.

People are focusing on this whole concept of control. It's not that Dallas wants "control" for 5 years. They want to be able to spread signing bonus money over 5 years instead of 4 as well as be able to restructure down the road if possible and shift cap hits into future years.

If they wanted to spread the money over 5 years they should have gotten the extension done before 2019. Dak was making only $2 million dollars that season.
 

AKATheRake

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,935
Reaction score
2,951
Franchise him 2 years in a row if need be.

Or because he was this year sign him to 4 years if that's what he wants next year. Overall a 5 year deal.
 

TwentyOne

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,585
Reaction score
4,246
Franchise him 2 years in a row if need be.

Or because he was this year sign him to 4 years if that's what he wants next year. Overall a 5 year deal.

The problem with a 4 year deal is that you cant spread the signing bonus to the max extend. We want at least 5 years because the SB can be spread over 5 years by rule.

And i dont think dak will give us a discount on his fully guranteed money just because he signed a shorter contract.
 

AKATheRake

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,935
Reaction score
2,951
The problem with a 4 year deal is that you cant spread the signing bonus to the max extend. We want at least 5 years because the SB can be spread over 5 years by rule.

And i dont think dak will give us a discount on his fully guranteed money just because he signed a shorter contract.

Less years less guaranteed money. That's how it works.

I understand about the SB being spread out.
 

glimmerman

Well-Known Member
Messages
29,956
Reaction score
29,841
The problem with a 4 year deal is that you cant spread the signing bonus to the max extend. We want at least 5 years because the SB can be spread over 5 years by rule.

And i dont think dak will give us a discount on his fully guranteed money just because he signed a shorter contract.
What I heard was he will sign 5 years but wants something like 45 million for that 5th year. Not sure how true that is or if any of these offers we are hearing is true.
 
Top