The Cost of Not Signing Dak (lengthy)

jaythecowboy · Jan 16, 2021

Cowboys should have gotten this done after 2018.

aria · Jan 16, 2021

Dak needs to cut off all communication, fly to Cabo where all the magic happens, and let his agent do the rest.

It’s all fun and games to Jerry until Cabo is involved.

gjkoeppen · Jan 16, 2021

ninja said:
@Hawkeye19 You bring up some good points about Dak being a leader and the team rallies around him. Problem is that they have had 5 years and not met expectations. Does Dak have what it takes to elevate his play to carry the team? So far, the answer is no. He can't even elevate his play in the 1st half of games..

So the Cowboys having the 31st or 32nd ranked defense had absolutely nothing to do with any of those losses now did it. Gee when Prescott was in this season, like last season, the Cowboys had the #1 ranked offense but then there's that pesky defensive thing. Even the best offense can't and doesn't score TD's on long drives every drive, but that bad defense sure had it problems keeping other teams offenses out of the end zone. More times than not if a team puts up 30 or more points and the defense manages to make some stops the team wins. That didn't happen in Dallas because the defense didn't stop anyone until the end of the season when they were up against low ranked offenses. Even teams like you say rally around their QB and win games the other 10 players on offense still had to do their jobs which means the line blocking, the receivers not dropping passes and then again their defenses makes stops. You need to look at EVERYTHING and not focus on just one player and position.
.
.

Hawkeye19 · Jan 16, 2021

csirl said:
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.

Dak gives us "0% chance at winning a SB"? What math/data/metric are you using to establish your opinion as fact?

And your point about Goff is noted-- but it helps when you have a D that leads the NFL in points given up vs Dak who has to score 30+ points every game in order to win. Sign Dak. Fix the D-- and you will see more success in Dallas.

gjkoeppen · Jan 16, 2021

aria said:
Dak needs to cut off all communication, fly to Cabo where all the magic happens, and let his agent do the rest.

It’s all fun and games to Jerry until Cabo is involved.

The biggest problem was Prescott's agent that never moved off his original demands. The two sides never negotiated it was the Cowboys making offers and France just sticking to his original demands. Negotiating means both side give and take but that never happened.
.
.

Hawkeye19 · Jan 16, 2021

Flamma said:
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?

Our Special Teams was abysmal in 2019. Finished around 10th or 11th in 2020. Quick turnaround. To win in the NFL you need to win 2 out of 3 phases of the game consistently (Offense, Defense, STs). We normally win the offensive phase, but get outperformed on D and STs. Last year, our D was atrocious, and due to injury, our offense was not as high powered as it normally is-- hence the 6-10 record.

I say all of that to say this. The offense will rebound with healthy players returning and adding a piece here of there in the draft or FA. The bulk of the work needs to be done on D. If we can add quality talent at every level of the D so that we can go from 31st against the run-- to 10-15th vs the run and 15-20th overall, and our STs stay on course-- this team can be competitive in the NFCE.

charron · Jan 16, 2021

QuincyCarterEra said:
Charron are you kidding?

Garrett lead the 31st ranked offense this year. What in the hell could you possibly be talking about?

Talking about what he did while he was here. The offense we used, the way this team was built, the types on investment made in the offense, Garrett had a big hand in. Doesn't mean you have to like it. But that is what actually happened.

gjkoeppen · Jan 16, 2021

Flamma said:
I really couldn't care less about the players faith in the team. If Prescott walks the team isn't doing anything good until they can find a suitable replacement. This is true with or without their faith.

So you're saying that management doesn't care about how the team feels about things? You're saying that how the players feel about letting Prescott go won't affect their play either consciously or subconsciously? If management didn't care about how the players feel then why do teams and the league kowtow to what certain players want outside of football? Yes it's a business but smart businessmen concider EVERYTHING when making those decisions.
.
.

CouchCoach · Jan 16, 2021

gjkoeppen said:
The biggest problem was Prescott's agent that never moved off his original demands. The two sides never negotiated it was the Cowboys making offers and France just sticking to his original demands. Negotiating means both side give and take but that never happened.
.
.

He was following the template laid out by how other agents dealt with the Joneses. They are the biggest blinkers in the league, why should he have wavered? I am sure he was convinced they would crater in the end, as is their MO. Plus, he already had 31.5M guaranteed to his player. Tagging has not proven to be a good negotiation tool.

And not negotiating is a sound strategy in negotiations.

G2 · Jan 16, 2021

kskboys said:
Denial doesn't make it not so.

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

You're not using the word negotiate properly. You're a very smart guy, so I suspect it's on purpose. They clearly negotiated. Refusing to come to an agreement would be more accurate.

QuincyCarterEra · Jan 16, 2021

charron said:
Talking about what he did while he was here. The offense we used, the way this team was built, the types on investment made in the offense, Garrett had a big hand in. Doesn't mean you have to like it. But that is what actually happened.

Yes the offense we used was an absolute negative, like I just pointed out. It's fact, doesn't mean you have to like it.

CowboysFaninHouston · Jan 16, 2021

gjkoeppen said:
So the Cowboys having the 31st or 32nd ranked defense had absolutely nothing to do with any of those losses now did it. Gee when Prescott was in this season, like last season, the Cowboys had the #1 ranked offense but then there's that pesky defensive thing. Even the best offense can't and doesn't score TD's on long drives every drive, but that bad defense sure had it problems keeping other teams offenses out of the end zone. More times than not if a team puts up 30 or more points and the defense manages to make some stops the team wins. That didn't happen in Dallas because the defense didn't stop anyone until the end of the season when they were up against low ranked offenses. Even teams like you say rally around their QB and win games the other 10 players on offense still had to do their jobs which means the line blocking, the receivers not dropping passes and then again their defenses makes stops. You need to look at EVERYTHING and not focus on just one player and position.
.
.

lets not forget coaching...I have asked all these dak detractors how many superbowls would Brady win with Garrett....only one responded and he said MAYBE 2. probably none.

but Dak has to overcome an incompetent GM, Coach, first year OC, bad defense all by his lonesome self.... else he is bad.....

CouchCoach · Jan 16, 2021

Streetwise said:
You're not using the word negotiate properly. You're a very smart guy, so I suspect it's on purpose. They clearly negotiated. Refusing to come to an agreement would be more accurate.

Oh, I think refusing to negotiate was definitely France's game plan. It can be very effective and very frustrating.

When I trained salespeople in radio, the number one item was how to negotiate with buyers because with just the sheer number of radio stations in a market, buyers were used to haggling for a better deal and auto dealers were the worst. My lesson was very easy to teach and understand, you do not negotiate, the price is the price and you better be prepared to walk it. Once you start negotiating, you don't stop.

I think that was France's strategy from the get go. He knew he was dealing with blinkers and the old man formed attachments to players and then just had to share that with the public and actually build up players he was about to try and re-sign, craziest negotiating process I've ever seen. It is as if he knew going in he was going to pay above market value going in so he had to raise the perceived value. He actually said Romo would play better because he was getting paid better and I think he really believed that.

Negotiating for some is like the guy at the bar when he asks a woman if she will sleep with him for $1M? She looks him up and down and says "yes". The he asks her if she'd sleep with him for $10. She slaps him and says "what kind of girl do you think I am"? He responds "we both know what kind of girl you are, we just haven't settled on price".

France set the ground rules and was willing to take the tag once they established that and that was the mistake. How are you going to hardline negotiate with a player guaranteed to make 29M more in 1 year than the made the previous 4 years?

If they were going to tag him, should have made it the non-exclusive and let the market establish value.

aria · Jan 16, 2021

gjkoeppen said:
The biggest problem was Prescott's agent that never moved off his original demands. The two sides never negotiated it was the Cowboys making offers and France just sticking to his original demands. Negotiating means both side give and take but that never happened.
.
.

Good for Dak, Jerry should have thought about that before caving to zeke and trying to teach zeke a lesson by giving Jaylon a contract prematurely.

Dak has done everything this team has asked him to do and been a great soldier on and off the field but Jerry rewards the underachieving players and divas.

99% of the time I side with management over the players, even Jerry, but Dak deserves his pay day because he’s worth it IMO and Jerry has been jerking him around for a couple years and has now dug himself and this team into a hole.

G2 · Jan 16, 2021

CouchCoach said:
Oh, I think refusing to negotiate was definitely France's game plan. It can be very effective and very frustrating.

When I trained salespeople in radio, the number one item was how to negotiate with buyers because with just the sheer number of radio stations in a market, buyers were used to haggling for a better deal and auto dealers were the worst. My lesson was very easy to teach and understand, you do not negotiate, the price is the price and you better be prepared to walk it. Once you start negotiating, you don't stop.

I think that was France's strategy from the get go. He knew he was dealing with blinkers and the old man formed attachments to players and then just had to share that with the public and actually build up players he was about to try and re-sign, craziest negotiating process I've ever seen. It is as if he knew going in he was going to pay above market value going in so he had to raise the perceived value. He actually said Romo would play better because he was getting paid better and I think he really believed that.

Negotiating for some is like the guy at the bar when he asks a woman if she will sleep with him for $1M? She looks him up and down and says "yes". The he asks her if she'd sleep with him for $10. She slaps him and says "what kind of girl do you think I am"? He responds "we both know what kind of girl you are, we just haven't settled on price".

France set the ground rules and was willing to take the tag once they established that and that was the mistake. How are you going to hardline negotiate with a player guaranteed to make 29M more in 1 year than the made the previous 4 years?

If they were going to tag him, should have made it the non-exclusive and let the market establish value.

Negotiating is discussions aimed at reaching an agreement, simple as that.

Redball Express · Jan 16, 2021

Hawkeye19 said:
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?

OMG.

You have internalized the whole dilemma.

Let me say this.

I like and wish Dak a huge win for him and our franchise and fan base.

But the thing is this injury. You are making assumptions "pre-Dak injury".

How do we know without paying Dak knowing if Dak is still Dak.?

Sorry for any confusion..

.Now that he is injured..how much protection should we be building into the situation at this point. Before we pay him..should we try to draft a QB with our first pick if he is there.

Is keeping Dalton a safe choice?

If we do not draft a QB high..then we are betting the house that Dak is going to return at least under the Tag and hope and pray he is healthy for 2021 and along with our other injured starters..

returns us to competitive levels.

That is the question to be answered.

CouchCoach · Jan 16, 2021

Streetwise said:
Negotiating is discussions aimed at reaching an agreement, simple as that.

Unless you have predetermined that you will not reach the agreement that you seek. France wasn't seeking agreement; he was seeking acquiescence because of the history of the Cowboys negotiations.

G2 · Jan 16, 2021

CouchCoach said:
Unless you have predetermined that you will not reach the agreement that you seek. France wasn't seeking agreement; he was seeking acquiescence because of the history of the Cowboys negotiations.

Maybe, but it seems like conjecture being that we don't have all of the information.

jjktkk · Jan 16, 2021

Hawkeye19 said:
As a fan-- Are you really willing to let him walk and potentially suffer the fallout over a 5 million per year difference?

Absolutely! Imo, if Jerra and friends REALLY believed Dak was an ELITE QB, they would of resigned Dak yesterday. I wouldn't let Dak walk necessarily, but I would love for the Cowboys and Texans to make a trade for each teams disgruntled QBs. Both QBs want or need a change of scenery. If this trade actually happened, it would make for a fascinating time for pro football in Dallas and Houston.

Flamma · Jan 16, 2021

jjktkk said:
Absolutely! Imo, if Jerra and friends REALLY believed Dak was an ELITE QB, they would of resigned Dak yesterday. I wouldn't let Dak walk necessarily, but I would love for the Cowboys and Texans to make a trade for each teams disgruntled QBs. Both QBs want or need a change of scenery. If this trade actually happened, it would make for a fascinating time for pro football in Dallas and Houston.

That would be very difficult to do for Houston. Watson is probably going to be very specific about what teams he's willing to be traded to. Plus they already paid Watson 27 million up front. Why would they want to repeat that process immediately with another QB?

The Cost of Not Signing Dak (lengthy)

jaythecowboy

Well-Known Member

aria

Well-Known Member

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member

Hawkeye19

Well-Known Member

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member

Hawkeye19

Well-Known Member

charron

Well-Known Member

gjkoeppen

Well-Known Member

CouchCoach

G2

Taco Engineer

QuincyCarterEra

Well-Known Member

CowboysFaninHouston

CowboysFaninDC

CouchCoach

aria

Well-Known Member

G2

Taco Engineer

Redball Express

All Aboard!!!

CouchCoach

G2

Taco Engineer

jjktkk

Well-Known Member

Flamma

Well-Known Member