10 year contract extension for Mahomes worth $500 million

xwalker said:

We'll see if the salary cap catches up to them.

They've been a bit loose with the cap.

They won a Super Bowl; therefore, whatever they did with the cap was worth it.

It was worth it to the Eagles to buy a Super Bowl but it did catch up to them.

Obviously all the cap space in the world is meaningless if the team does not get to the Super Bowl, but the cap does catch up to teams at times.

It worked for KC with moves like paying Anthony Hitchens 9M per. I was a fan of Hitchens as an over-achieving 4th round pick, but there is not a huge difference in Hitchens and Cowboys backup backup Joe Thomas.

Click to expand...

I can see the skepticism as it pertains to the cap.

But any time you can lock up the undisputed best player in the NFL right now, that's a risk you just have to take.

I think Mahomes will win 2-3 titles over the course of his career.

OmerV said:

lol - wow, this makes zero sense. I didnt say anything about Dak agreeing to take less money, you just made that up out of thin air to fabricate an argument that doesn't even exist.

The word "restructure" does not suggest anything other than moving things around, and I did not indicate otherwise. And that's what I was saying Dak would likely be willing to do - to restructure to help with the cap burdens.

And yes, it does take the player being "willing". A team cannot simply decide to restructure a contract without the player's consent.

Click to expand...

You said "willing" to take a restructure, as if that's some sort of magnanimous move on his part. At least that's how I read it. My apologies if that wasn't your intent.

.

ABQCOWBOY said:

This is exactly right. This is a poison pill from the Dak team and Jerry and Stephen know this. It's a shot across the bow IMO and this, more then anything, is why I believe that Dak is going to the tag. Dak has basically seen his best contract offer he'll see this season, already. Dak is going to play on the Tag IMO and he may be in that situation for the next couple of seasons, IDK. I think Jerry sees or saw Dak as one of his guys initially. I think Dak kinda went another way on that and this might be a little personal, regardless of what is said in public.

I have no proof of this, it just kind of feels that way to me.

Click to expand...

Poison pill is apt. By asking for a huge payment in the 5th year, they are trying to make that 5th year as unpalatable as possible for the Cowboys - and they will either cave on a 4 year deal or basically have to give Dak a new contract after 4 years to avoid the big cap hit in Year 5.

Jerry has a habit of buckling when things get tough - we saw it with Lawrence and Zeke. But I expect if he buckles, it's going to happen in the next week. If Jerry lets the July 15th deadline go past, I think it's a sign he's digging in.

jterrell said:

ROFL congratulating each other for not understanding the contract is hilarious.

The deal is 477 for 10 years.
He has 2 years coming ALREADY that bring it up to a possible 503M earned over 12 years.
But his new deal is 10 years 477M or 47.7M per season.
A leap of 12.7M AAV and his contract is structured much like Zeke's to hand him guarantees yearly(up to ~400M total so deep into the contract) or a release with a large check.

His deal is written very much like Zeke's because like Zeke he had 2 years left.

Click to expand...

Would you pipe down. Does your nose bleed from the ivory tower.

Sydla said:

This is just not entirely accurate. It's likely not over the actual money but rather the cap hit. That's why the Cowboys want the 5th year. They want an extra year to give them cap flexibility. Paying Dak in excess of $45MM in that 5th year in cash would defeat the purpose of Dallas asking for that 5th year. Because he could carry a cap hit in that last year in excess of $50MM.

Click to expand...

if the 45 mil is all non guaranteed. Then the cowboys would have the option to push some dead money into that final season, and then when the final season comes either cut Dak and not eat any of the 45 mil or sign him to an extension.

that being said, it does remove the option of actually having him play on that 5th season without a restructure. So it does limit the contract in that capacity.

unless QB contracts And the salary cap jump so high, that the 45 mil number 5 years from now actually is actually a good deal. Which is possible too I suppose. Provided the virus situation doesn’t F up the caps growth for the next 5 years.

it’s certainly a hardball technique by Dak’s agent

dogunwo said:

No, because the best players didn't play in those startup leagues, which is my point.

Click to expand...

They had several star players but you’re missing the bigger point.

The teams and the league is the product. The players are the stars. Take a handful out and it’s still a popular product. New stars would emerge.

dogunwo said:

The TV contracts have out clauses tied to actual playing of games and ratings.

Click to expand...

Were you around for the 1987 strike with our Replacement players?

Sydla said:

You said "willing" to take a restructure, as if that's some sort of magnanimous move on his part. At least that's how I read it. My apologies if that wasn't your intent.

.

Click to expand...

I just said Dak would be willing to work with them. Besides, a restructure does stretch out payments beyond the original schedule, so there actually is a concession on the part of the player because of the time value of money.

Whyjerry said:

Would you pipe down. Does your nose bleed from the ivory tower.

Click to expand...

LOL. You want to be left alone in error?

Some folks just don't have the understanding and I am trying to help clarify the reality of this contract for people who honestly want to know.
Other folks are willfully misleading people in some weird sophist debate strategy and that is why you see my tone be what it is.
Nothing is more frustrating to me than intellectual dishonesty.

This deal is actually very good for all starting QBs side in future negotiations.
Any thought otherwise is tilting at windmills.

Contract sites are listing it as 10 years 450M and 45M AAV.
Other deals will reference those numbers.

jterrell said:

LOL. You want to be left alone in error?

Some folks just don't have the understanding and I am trying to help clarify the reality of this contract for people who honestly want to know.
Other folks are willfully misleading people in some weird sophist debate strategy and that is why you see my tone be what it is.
Nothing is more frustrating to me than intellectual dishonesty.

This deal is actually very good for all starting QBs side in future negotiations.
Any thought otherwise is tilting at windmills.

Contract sites are listing it as 10 years 450M and 45M AAV.
Other deals will reference those numbers.

Click to expand...

There’s other clauses involved. Which could bring the deal up to 503 million. Not to mention the remaining 2 years of current deal.

I love these signing bonuses over 3 years. Don’t believe I’ve seen one like this before.

Mahomes will receive $83 million-plus in signing bonuses from 2021 to '23 ($21.7 million in '21, $27.4 million in '22, $34 million-plus in '23). Those first three years are fully guaranteed, sources told ESPN's Jeremy Fowler.

The Hunt family and the Chiefs know how to get a deal done and prevent the drama surrounding it. What a class organization!!

DFWJC said:

35/yr for Dak is not the same as 33.5 for Goff.

Plus Goff's 4 year extension was essentially a 5 year deal anyway

Click to expand...

You're right. The AAV is not the same when you're offering the same guaranteed amount in a different number of years. Dak shouldn't agree to that. Goff's deal isn't "essentially" anything. It's new money tacked on the back of another contract with $110M in guarantees. The fact they use math hijinks to spread it out is immaterial when negotiating a new deal. Where have you seen Goff's deal advertised as "really $28.6M AAV" like you're trying to do with Mahommes' deal? If they want to tie Dak to an extra year because they need "math space," they need to up the guarantees. The fact the team didn't lock him up when they had the space is not Dak's fault. They did it for Zeke with 2 years to go.

Hey, I admit I'm no contract wizard so I'll fully admit if I'm not seeing something that someone or an article can lay out plainly. But here (and among others who want Dak to get less), you're injecting a slant that I've never seen explained as a consideration in contract negotiations for new money. So it can only mean that it's injected to set a scene that someone hopes to see. And what have I told folks around here about hope-posting? Lol. Mahommes' new money bumps everything up, extension or not. I get not wanting to see it like so many anti-pay Dakkers here, but reality is reality. Same for people trying to bend reality to create CONSPIRACY! with penalties, lol. Just have to accept it. Many don't and that's fine. Extra entertainment.

jterrell said:

LOL. You want to be left alone in error?

Some folks just don't have the understanding and I am trying to help clarify the reality of this contract for people who honestly want to know.
Other folks are willfully misleading people in some weird sophist debate strategy and that is why you see my tone be what it is.
Nothing is more frustrating to me than intellectual dishonesty.

This deal is actually very good for all starting QBs side in future negotiations.
Any thought otherwise is tilting at windmills.

Contract sites are listing it as 10 years 450M and 45M AAV.
Other deals will reference those numbers.

Click to expand...

Fella I have an engineering degree and I am a CFA charter holder don’t be such a condescending clown. I fully understand contracts.

OmerV said:

Even if he had been offered the same deal as Goff and Wentz, which you admit is only your assumption, getting on the market earlier wouldn’t have meant he got a better deal, it would have just meant his rookie deal was shorter than theirs, therefore his 4 years extension would have started before their 4 year extensions.

Besides, he had no choice as a rookie on the timing difference between his rookie deal and those of Wentz and Goff. The league and CBA dictated that, and there is no expectation or obligation for him to change his timing to fit with theirs.

And it’s not as if the benefit on the rookie deals was all on his side because he got paid much less than they did.

Click to expand...

He was offered more guaranteed money.

And there is no obligation for Dallas to change their timing. The Rams and Eagles basically exercised the fifth year option and extended Goff and Wentz to be where Dak would be after his fifth year. The point is, the Cowboys did offer market value to Dak.

And Dak has no way proven he is anywhere near Mahomes. The market is really Goff and Wentz, if one even wants to make that case.

Diehardblues said:

They had several star players but you’re missing the bigger point.

The teams and the league is the product. The players are the stars. Take a handful out and it’s still a popular product. New stars would emerge.

Click to expand...

But I am not taking about a handful. In my theoretical example, I am taking about ALL current players or ALL current owners.

Diehardblues said:

Were you around for the 1987 strike with our Replacement players?

Click to expand...

You think the dynamics of the league in 2020 are the same as in 1987?

khiladi said:

He was offered more guaranteed money. And there is no obligation for Dallas to change their timing. The point is, the Cowboys did offer market value to Dak.

Click to expand...

How do you know he was offered more guaranteed money? People make these claims, but where is the evidence.

Dallas timing was never the same as the Eagles or Rams though, so a new contract starting at the end of Dak's rookie contract is not changing the timing, it's just the timing that was set in motion in 2016. Again, the difference on timing of Dak's contract relative to Wentz and Goff's contracts is because the NFL allows a 5th year option with 1st round picks that is not part of the deal with 4th round picks. That's just circumstances that Dak wasn't responsible for, and really neither was Dallas. The 5th year option with 1st rounders is dictated by NFL and CBA rules, and as such that's just the base timing both sides had to start with when negotiations on a new deal began.

That's not to say Dallas can't attempt to negotiate a new 5 year deal to make the end of Dak's new contract time with the end of Wentz and Goff's new 4 year deals, but just as that is their right, Dak also has the right to determine it his better for him to stick with a 4 year deal. Ultimately, neither side has to accept the position of the other.

jterrell said:

LOL. You want to be left alone in error?

Some folks just don't have the understanding and I am trying to help clarify the reality of this contract for people who honestly want to know.
Other folks are willfully misleading people in some weird sophist debate strategy and that is why you see my tone be what it is.
Nothing is more frustrating to me than intellectual dishonesty.

This deal is actually very good for all starting QBs side in future negotiations.
Any thought otherwise is tilting at windmills.

Contract sites are listing it as 10 years 450M and 45M AAV.
Other deals will reference those numbers.

Click to expand...

This Man today is Preaching the Gospel!where is the offering plate

ABQCOWBOY said:

I tend to agree but when will that be? Nobody knows and you can't build the future on that kind of foundation with a contract IMO.

Click to expand...

No one knows when things get back to normal
That’s all we know for sure is we don’t know
I’m ready for camp because that will tell us about the roster and maybe give us an idea of what a football season is gonna look like, or not look like