The Cost of Not Signing Dak (lengthy)

Steve007

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,073
Reaction score
1,001
I'll say it again....this is right up there with debating Jerry stepping down.....

There's ZERO shot of it happening so why debate it?
I think your right. They will over pay Dak and the cowboys will be a 8 to 9 win team. Might get lucky and win a play off game, but they wont go deep into the playoffs.
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,059
Reaction score
46,962
I think he's Alex Smith.

McNabb was a difference maker on the field for several years. Dak's just a guy on the field.
For an exact comparison(high volume yardage) maybe Culpepper.

McNabb was inconsistent, more like Watson.
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,059
Reaction score
46,962
No it wasn't. I think you are confused again about what negotiate means. He turned down a 5 year offer and wanted a 4 year. They tagged him and he stated he was happy to be a Cowboy.
I'm fine with being wrong, but illustrate when he refused to negotiate.
Denial doesn't make it not so.

It was well known that France refused to negotiate w/ Dallas.
 

kskboys

Well-Known Member
Messages
44,059
Reaction score
46,962
Nice post. Thanks for sharing. At this point I'm not sure it matters if Dak leaves or stays. While I agree items 1, 2, and 3 are important, they are all neutralized by item number 4. A QB can only overcome so much.

Aikman had a far better TEAM around him than any QB since (I don't want to hear about Pro Bowlers, I'm talking about TEAM - this includes coaches as well as cohesion). He also had a top 10 defense when he won rings.

The only time this team has had any real leadership has been under Landry, Jimmy, and Parcells. Jerry fired Landry, was miserable with Jimmy, and only bit the bullet on Parcells to get his stadium deal done. When the Tuna left what did we get? A dish rag happy to get another HC gig (Wade), which is exactly what we have again with McCarthy. In between Jerry wasted a decade waiting for Garrett to make him look like a genius.

Sign Dak, don't sign Dak, this team is only going so far either way. It's a rudderless ship steered by guys who can't decide what kind of defense they even want much less know how to put one together.
Very well done.
 

Typhus

Captain Catfish
Messages
19,558
Reaction score
22,450
Actually Jerry wanted a 5 year deal. Dak was okay with 4.

As for #1 or #2 money, he was never asking for anything like Mahomes got, or even Watson, although that came later. He was looking at something along the lines of what Wentz and Goff got, with maybe a slight increase because he was negotiating more recently.

One thing people have to do is stop thinking of pay as a position ranking. It's not, and it can't be because all QB's don't negotiate new contracts at the same time under the same market conditions. That's not to say how a player stacks up against others isn't part of the negotiation, but that's only one factor. Look at the examples of Wentz and Goff, who both got a better deal than Aaron Rodgers. That wasn't a statement that Wentz and Goff are better players than Rodgers, it was just that Rodgers contract was older and negotiated under different conditions. If Rodgers had been negotiating a new deal at that time he would have commanded more pay than those guys.
Of course he was OK with 4,, that was the entire issue
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
Jerry stepping down for sure is a zero chance scenario. Dak not getting signed is unlikely, but this situation has not gotten done the past 2 years, and now Dak is coming off injury and the D is clearly broken and in desperate need of rebuilding. There is a chance Dak's agent plays real hardball here. The tag is 38 mil. Mahommes is getting 50 mil per... what is to stop Todd France from asking for 45?

If he drives the price up-- and Dallas tags Dak again-- the divorce is on. Players hate the tag. And Dak already got seriously hurt once on a tag. He wants (and deserves) security considering what other QBs are making. If Dallas doesn't adjust their posture, and try and play hardball back-- I think there is a chance they lose him. Again, not likely-- but stranger things have happened. Definitely worth discussing because until the Dak situation resolves, we can't build out the rest of the roster because of too many unknowns.




I agree with most of what you said in your opening and you are right that the market value for QB's goes up every year, but I don't think every player hates to get tagged. I think we both agree that Prescott is intelligent. First Prescott has said several times how he grew up being a Cowboys fan and his dream was to someday play for the Cowboys. Prescott didn't sign a long term contract before last season because of how France negotiated or actually didn't negotiate because he never moved from his original demands. Then the Cowboys tagged Prescott and he instantly got a guaranteed salary for 2020 that was TEN TIMES more than what he made in 2019 from the team that he had dreamed to someday to play for. Do I think that Prescott would rather have gotten a long term deal done, he11 yes, but I also don't think Prescott was as badly hurt as you think he was by getting tagged. There was a report that Prescott was upset that was given by France and I think that was just another of France's ploys to make the Cowboys look bad and help his client. Again expanding on Prescott's intelligence I'm sure that he knows that tagging him was a way the Cowboys had to make sure they could continue to negotiate on a long term contract once free agency started.
.
.
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
It appears as if he wants to walk.




That's nothing more that your opinion. Here's mine. Prescott has said several times that he grew up a Cowboys fan and his dream was always to someday play for the Cowboys. I really doubt he really wants to walk away from his dream job.
.
.
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
Dak does not want security. He was offered that and refused.





His agent, France, was feeding Prescott that the Cowboys would cave and he would get what France had demanded. Prescott realized that it wasn't going to happen so in the final hour or so Prescott started negotiating for himself and they got the dollar amount per year done, 35 mil and not the 40 mil that the media kept saying it would be, but they ran out of time to get the length and guaranteed amount done before time ran out. Your claim that Prescott doesn't want security is based solely because he didn't take a contract that you think or wanted him to take.
.
.
 

Flamma

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,809
Reaction score
18,673
If you let him leave-- how do you replace his production?

Look, I'm not going to get into the rest of your post, you have a valid opinion. I can't really argue with much of it. It's this part that I often see from not only you, but many posters. It's nonsense IMO. Rhetorical. Are you really looking for an answer? You could ask the exact same question if Dak asked for 75 million a year. It's not a valid reason to pay someone so why ask the question in the first place?
 

Hadenough

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,342
Reaction score
12,566
Im not sold on Prescott as being good enough talent wise to lead this team to a NFC Championship game. He one of the best when it comes to pounding bad teams but his true colors come out when things get tight. The thing about Dak is you cant look at stats with him because he has really poured it on against the bad teams in the NFC east. Thats changing though and those teams are getting better. Dak has been in the league 5 years and has one playoff win that could be credited to Zekes tremendous game. I just dont see Dak winning the big games. And we all have gotten tired of hearing the excuse about the defense. The times when they have shown up Prescott is MIA! Dominant defenses in the NFL are rare in todays game. Its up to the QB to put together long methodical 15 play drives and score TDs to help out the defense. Dak isnt worth what the market dictates and he has one helluva lot of nerve trying to hold the Cowboys hostage. I know what will happen when they pay Dak and for those who dont know just look at the Vikings. Cousins and Dak are about the same player.
 

Flamma

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,809
Reaction score
18,673
Sure, the specifics can be debated, but he is going to be here.

I just hope its at a reasonable number and terms.

You probably already know I'm not the biggest Dak fanboy. I don't care if they sign him or not. Doesn't matter to me if he walks. But if they do sign him, look at the guarantee, not the overall number. That's what he'll be paid. He won't be seeing the last year of his contract, which should be the rest of it.
 

Hawkeye19

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,136
Reaction score
21,132
Look, I'm not going to get into the rest of your post, you have a valid opinion. I can't really argue with much of it. It's this part that I often see from not only you, but many posters. It's nonsense IMO. Rhetorical. Are you really looking for an answer? You could ask the exact same question if Dak asked for 75 million a year. It's not a valid reason to pay someone so why ask the question in the first place?

If you let Dak walk, you need a plan to replace him. Many fans are short-sighted and over-react about money/cap— but then don’t offer up a viable plan to find a decent QB. What FA QB do you suggest going after? What QB do you want to target in the draft? How much will it cost to get either?

Sure— everything is somewhat vague— but we can look at the same list of free agent QBs that JJ can, and scout the same QB class that Will McClay can.

The reason most fans don’t offer up a plan, is because there aren’t any sure-fire QBs out there that are better than Dak— they just would be cheaper— and so the argument boils down to improving the team by investing resources in other positions, and “getting by” at QB.

Look at the teams in the playoffs right now. Which team has just “gotten by” without a solid financial commitment to a QB?
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
Look, I'm not going to get into the rest of your post, you have a valid opinion. I can't really argue with much of it. It's this part that I often see from not only you, but many posters. It's nonsense IMO. Rhetorical. Are you really looking for an answer? You could ask the exact same question if Dak asked for 75 million a year. It's not a valid reason to pay someone so why ask the question in the first place?




To try to dispute something and using some possibility that you truly don't believe would happen either isn't really a valid point.
.
.
 

csirl

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,693
Reaction score
3,989
If you let Dak walk, you need a plan to replace him. Many fans are short-sighted and over-react about money/cap— but then don’t offer up a viable plan to find a decent QB. What FA QB do you suggest going after? What QB do you want to target in the draft? How much will it cost to get either?

Sure— everything is somewhat vague— but we can look at the same list of free agent QBs that JJ can, and scout the same QB class that Will McClay can.

The reason most fans don’t offer up a plan, is because there aren’t any sure-fire QBs out there that are better than Dak— they just would be cheaper— and so the argument boils down to improving the team by investing resources in other positions, and “getting by” at QB.

Look at the teams in the playoffs right now. Which team has just “gotten by” without a solid financial commitment to a QB?

If Dak stays, we wont win, so signing him is futile. 0% chance of a SB.

We are within touching distance of drafting an elite QB this year. Trading our 1st and next years 1st will get us one. It's not without it's risks, but the chances of success are much greater than with Dak - particularly since we can also sign a vet backup who's not that different to Dak for a few million a year.

People keep bringing up the Paxton Lynch draft class as a reason why not to draft, but the assessment of QBs fundamentally changed in scouting circles after that draft (less emphasis on gym shorts stuff). Since then the strike rate is very good. Look at this years playoffs. Full of recently drafted 1st round QBs who Dak fans have been slating over the past couple of years.

Look at Goff - one of the biggest whipping boys for Dak fans. Im not 100% sold on Goff. But, guess who's in the second round of the playoffs after wimning a road game with a broken thumb? That's leadership......and he's already won a NFC Championship.
 

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,703
Reaction score
3,327
Im not sold on Prescott as being good enough talent wise to lead this team to a NFC Championship game. He one of the best when it comes to pounding bad teams but his true colors come out when things get tight. The thing about Dak is you cant look at stats with him because he has really poured it on against the bad teams in the NFC east. Thats changing though and those teams are getting better. Dak has been in the league 5 years and has one playoff win that could be credited to Zekes tremendous game. I just dont see Dak winning the big games. And we all have gotten tired of hearing the excuse about the defense. The times when they have shown up Prescott is MIA! Dominant defenses in the NFL are rare in todays game. Its up to the QB to put together long methodical 15 play drives and score TDs to help out the defense. Dak isnt worth what the market dictates and he has one helluva lot of nerve trying to hold the Cowboys hostage. I know what will happen when they pay Dak and for those who dont know just look at the Vikings. Cousins and Dak are about the same player.






So when QB's like Wilson doesn't ALL BY HIMSELF take Seattle on 15 play TD drives multiple times to rest his defense then Wilson must not be a good QB. In week 13 Seattle against the giants scored one, a single TD so Wilson must be a bad QB because he didn't have multiple 15 play TD drives. What the Prescott haters just don't get is even with the best QB the rest of the offense STILL has to do their jobs. The line still has to block to give the QB time, the receivers have to catch the ball and not drop them, but first the receivers have to get themselves open. To listen to some of you, you think that really good QB's can win and don't even need the other 10 players on offense.

Now the Cousins comparison. Just what NFL records did Cousins set as a rookie, or what NFL records has Cousins ever set? Prescott started setting NFL records as a rookie and has set others since then. The only similarities is both were tagged.

Luckily for Prescott you don't set market value on any player especially QB's.
.
.
 

BHendri5

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,950
Reaction score
1,303
TLDR: Letting Dak walk hurts this franchise a lot more than it helps us, in both the short and long term.

I have gone back and forth on the Dak-Dilemma for months. I am not a Dak hater. I consider myself a Dak-realist. He is not "elite" in my opinion (Mahommes, Rodgers are the only 2 QBs this year that qualify as elite in my estimation). Nor is he "mediocre" or "average" as many on this site claim. He is good. At times, he is really good. At other times, his play is borderline average.

And so we have arrived at a crossroads. To pay or not to pay? 2 years ago-- fans were arguing on whether or not he was worth 30 mil per year. Many said "not worth more than 25". Then Wentz and Goff signed-- and the needle moved to 34-35 mil per, and the counter was "not worth more 30". Then Mahommes and Watson signed, and the conversation is now 40 mil per and the counter is now "not worth more than 35". The simple truth is the QB market has been drastically reset over the past 2 years, and the cost of good QB play has significantly risen. Had we signed Dak 2 years ago for 30 mil, we would be in the middle of a sweetheart of a deal. But I digress....

If you let him walk... you gain cap space, yes-- but what do you lose? I've been thinking about the following items:

1. Fractured Locker-room. The players love him. He is the unquestioned leader and this is "Dak's team". If we choose to not pay him, the move will NOT be well received by the players and a riff occurs and eyebrows are raised. Add to that the pressure you put on Dak's replacement to fill his shoes on the field, and with his buddies off it-- and you have a bad situation ready to explode.

2. You lose top 10 level QB play on the field. No-- he is not top 3. But he is not middling either. IMO-- he is trending up, and his quality of play is top 10 in the NFL-- and that will win a lot of games. If you let him leave-- how do you replace his production?

3. Leadership intangibles. Related to point #1 for sure-- but Dak may have the best leadership skill of any QB in the NFL right now. Yes, Rodgers is a HOF player, but some of his teammates hate the guy. Mahommes is a stud and well-liked-- but Dak just is a natural born leader. He says the right things. He does the right things. He is football smart, but he has a high emotional IQ as well. Yes, you could trade up to draft a rookie-- but what you might gain (stress "might") in the football talent category, you more than likely lose a TON when it comes to leadership and "face of the franchise" factor.

4. You stand to lose Rep/Cred. If you let Dak walk, and he gets signed by another team, and hoists a Lombardi-- you will forever be the FO that "couldn't get a deal done with a high caliber franchise QB". Ouch. This franchise is already a laughing stock-- but that would take things to a new low-- especially if the "solution" they bring in to replace Dak doesn't pan out.

Therefore-- the best thing for the entire franchise is to sign Dak to a 4-5 year deal. We will overpay. But the number most fans are comfortable with paying him has already moved from 25 million per year 2 years ago, to 35 million per year now. As a fan-- Are you really willing to let him walk and potentially suffer the fallout over a 5 million per year difference?



Dak imo is elite, he is in the top 4, joining Wilson, Mahomes and Rodgers.
 

fivetwos

Well-Known Member
Messages
19,062
Reaction score
25,889
You probably already know I'm not the biggest Dak fanboy. I don't care if they sign him or not. Doesn't matter to me if he walks. But if they do sign him, look at the guarantee, not the overall number. That's what he'll be paid. He won't be seeing the last year of his contract, which should be the rest of it.
I've seen him come up small same as you have.

I don't think he is great by any means but I think the offense is good enough to win with as is, and I don't want to throw away a capable QB and go for years looking for a replacement unless the roster needed a full gut...and I don't think it does.

Point though is that Jerry feels what I just wrote times a billion.

First, he thinks Dak is on the level of the top QBs, because he clearly overrates the talent of players he likes personally....

Secondly, even if he didn't think so much of Dak, no way he would sign up to go QB hunting for the next how ever long at his age.
 

csirl

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,693
Reaction score
3,989
Point though is that Jerry feels what I just wrote times a billion.

First, he thinks Dak is on the level of the top QBs, because he clearly overrates the talent of players he likes personally.....

+1 on Jerry over rating players he likes.

Jerry likes Paxton Lynch.
Jerry likes Connor Cook.
Jerry likes Quincy Carter.
Jerry likes Drew Henson.
Jerry likes Ryan Leaf.

So if Jerry likes Dak.......
 

Flamma

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,809
Reaction score
18,673
If you let Dak walk, you need a plan to replace him. Many fans are short-sighted and over-react about money/cap— but then don’t offer up a viable plan to find a decent QB. What FA QB do you suggest going after? What QB do you want to target in the draft? How much will it cost to get either?

Sure— everything is somewhat vague— but we can look at the same list of free agent QBs that JJ can, and scout the same QB class that Will McClay can.

The reason most fans don’t offer up a plan, is because there aren’t any sure-fire QBs out there that are better than Dak— they just would be cheaper— and so the argument boils down to improving the team by investing resources in other positions, and “getting by” at QB.

Look at the teams in the playoffs right now. Which team has just “gotten by” without a solid financial commitment to a QB?

The same could be said for any team. But the bottom line is, teams with good quarterbacks on rookie contracts or that have a minimal impact for a cap hit are going to and or winning super bowls. Not teams with quarterbacks taking up 15% or more of the cap.

There is no easy way to replace Dak or we wouldn't be talking about how much he should make. He'd be replaced. But if the results are going to be the same, what difference does it make if we go 8-8 or 4-12?
 
Top