News: PFT: Should the Cowboys have let Dak Prescott hit the open market?

CouchCoach · Mar 23, 2021

I think what they are missing is either the smokescreen or real interest that WFT let leak out there and the fact they have more room under the cap. I think Booger looked at that as the #1 threat to losing his QB and losing him exactly where he didn't want to lose him.

This might have played out differently, although I doubt it, had WFT not been sitting there with a "QB Wanted" sign out there. And they didn't sign Fitzpatrick until Prescott was off the market. I think Snyder either wanted Prescott or he wanted Booger to pay him a boatload of money.

The only thing that I am sure of is that someone, who just can't get enough of Daktalk, would bring something up after the fact when it is a long gone moot point. Boring and lazy to the end.

Typhus · Mar 23, 2021

Future said:
Yes, completely. It is the absolute worst decision they could have made. The logic is "let's not let the agent set the price (which, he didn't anyway), let's let other teams set the price!"

The idea that they would have gotten Dak cheaper if he went to the open market is absolutely, completely wrong. Price would have gone up, probably significantly.

No, what Im saying is there is a faction of brain trust that would have let Dak draw his interest, his market price, and there is a legitimate argument for that scenario.
Its been dragged out from both sides for so long, Im not even going to entertain the debate,, Im just saying that its not so open shut as you suggest.

Future · Mar 23, 2021

Typhus said:
No, what Im saying is there is a faction of brain trust that would have let Dak draw his interest, his market price, and there is a legitimate argument for that scenario.
Its been dragged out from both sides for so long, Im not even going to entertain the debate,, Im just saying that its not so open shut as you suggest.

No there isn't.

JustChip · Mar 23, 2021

ABQCOWBOY said:
How many teams have come out ahead in the QB negotiations Wars? Perhaps the answer is that teams need to stop doing business the way they have been in recent years. It's clearly not working in terms of managing QB salaries.

This is the best answer. It’s very similar to the ridiculous top draftee contracts that ran rampant before the negotiated draftee/rookie wage scale. It is possible this will change, but not likely to in my opinion. All it takes is one owner to blow the market up.

ABQCOWBOY · Mar 23, 2021

Denim Chicken said:
QBs are being paid what the market is valuing them at. What you are wanting is collusion. Teams are free to take the market value or release the player. There is no compulsion for a team to pay anything over what their internal limits are.

How do you prove what that is? Nobody was going to pay Dak the amount we did, especially having to give up draft picks. This is not a negotiation in a vacuum. That is leverage that could have been applied but was not. Instead, we are so concerned with what Dak and his agent think about what negotiation tactics are used. Well, I guarantee you, they weren't concerned about what tactics to use against the team.

This idea that it is collusion is ridiculous. Show any proof, at all, that this is what is happening because I'm betting any amount you want that you can't. That has nothing to do with anything and you know it. At least you should. So you go ahead and tell me, how does collusion fit with allowing a player and his agent to go out and negotiate a deal with another team, allowing each party to freely discuss said contract with every team in the League if there is interest. Exactly how does that fit a collusion narrative? I mean, are you listening to yourself right now? Collusion, OK, explain that to me in a none exclusive situation if you please.

Swagger · Mar 23, 2021

ABQCOWBOY said:
Absolutely, he should have. Should have done it in 2020 tbh. If he had, I believe we would be paying in the 30 mil range with no No Trade Clause or restrictions on Tagging. But what do I know right? At least, that's what many of the fans on this board said when I suggested this two years ago.

So here we are, paying 160 on a 4 year deal. I guess I have a lot of company in that, "I know nothing" club........

Yes when looked at objectively, it's an ill advised horrific deal considering the player is coming off a serious ankle injury (important component of his game) and the no trade clause is one sided.
But it's done so no point dwelling upon it.
The salary cap hit for year 1 is fine, so provided he can move freely on it then we could make some noise next season although I personally foresee another disaster.

cowboyec · Mar 23, 2021

no.
not with the way they shop in f/a.
let Dak walk and we end up with ???
matt barkley....joe flacco...who knows.
much better to just keep your young QB.
life is better when you have your QB.

Doomsday101 · Mar 23, 2021

Bottom line Dallas organization wanted Dak here and thus paid him. People do not have to agree with it but it is what it is. They choose to pay than risk losing him same reason other teams pay their QB and do not expose them to the open market.

ABQCOWBOY · Mar 23, 2021

JustChip said:
This is the best answer. It’s very similar to the ridiculous top draftee contracts that ran rampant before the negotiated draftee/rookie wage scale. It is possible this will change, but not likely to in my opinion. All it takes is one owner to blow the market up.

Yep. One club will step out and take advantage of an opportunity to manage cap and translate that into improvement of their overall roster. Once that happens and it translates into a Championship, every team in the league will jump on board. It's a copycat league.

I think you are right.

ActualCowboysFan · Mar 23, 2021

Fitzpatrick, Dalton, Jameis. That's the level of free agent QBs. No one lets good QBs out of their grasp.

JustChip · Mar 23, 2021

Denim Chicken said:
QBs are being paid what the market is valuing them at. What you are wanting is collusion. Teams are free to take the market value or release the player. There is no compulsion for a team to pay anything over what their internal limits are.

It’s only collusion if the teams conspire together to limit. But it is not collusion if I, as an owner on my own, decide not participate in paying above a certain amount. Of course, if teams decide to do that independently of each other and the market goes down, there’s no doubt the NFLPA will accuse the teams of collusion and file suit. The only solution would be a negotiated system whereby there are caps on individual positions.

jaythecowboy · Mar 23, 2021

ABQCOWBOY said:
How do you prove what that is? Nobody was going to pay Dak the amount we did, especially having to give up draft picks. This is not a negotiation in a vacuum. That is leverage that could have been applied but was not. Instead, we are so concerned with what Dak and his agent think about what negotiation tactics are used. Well, I guarantee you, they weren't concerned about what tactics to use against the team.

Had the Cowboys used the nonexclusive tag, the only positive solution would be for a team to pay Dak a contract he wanted. Otherwise, he plays on the nonexclusive tag and the Cowboys would have zero leverage with Dak getting to true free agency the following year.

Typhus · Mar 23, 2021

Future said:
No there isn't.

Then I respectfully disagree to agree with your premise.

TwoCentPlain · Mar 23, 2021

This was not a decision made to bring the team closer to a super bowl victory. This was a decision to appease the ‘Cult of Dak’ fans who would have revolted at not seeing their ‘hero’ out there. It was also to appease the players who like Dak.

That ridiculous contract had nothing to do with fielding a top team and everything to do with making money and appeasing fans and players.

People will buy tickets, watch the commercials that come with the game, and buy merchandise. Mission accomplished. If they win, fine. If not, no biggie. Still raking in the dough.

Future · Mar 23, 2021

Swagger said:
Yes when looked at objectively, it's an ill advised horrific deal considering the player is coming off a serious ankle injury (important component of his game) and the no trade clause is one sided.
But it's done so no point dwelling upon it.
The salary cap hit for year 1 is fine, so provided he can move freely on it then we could make some noise next season although I personally foresee another disaster.

Objectively, it's a 5x$38m, the injury doesn't matter, and the total cap hit for the first two years will end up around $40m.

Objectively, it's a great contract.

bsbellomy · Mar 23, 2021

fivetwos said:
Maybe the market is soft for other positions, but not for a QB like Prescott, regardless of what anyone around here may think of him.

And you are basing this on what?

viman96 · Mar 23, 2021

IMO this would have resulted Dak playing on the 2nd franchise tag

Denim Chicken · Mar 23, 2021

ABQCOWBOY said:
How do you prove what that is? Nobody was going to pay Dak the amount we did, especially having to give up draft picks. This is not a negotiation in a vacuum. That is leverage that could have been applied but was not. Instead, we are so concerned with what Dak and his agent think about what negotiation tactics are used. Well, I guarantee you, they weren't concerned about what tactics to use against the team.

This idea that it is collusion is ridiculous. Show any proof, at all, that this is what is happening because I'm betting any amount you want that you can't. That has nothing to do with anything and you know it. At least you should. So you go ahead and tell me, how does collusion fit with allowing a player and his agent to go out and negotiate a deal with another team, allowing each party to freely discuss said contract with every team in the League if there is interest. Exactly how does that fit a collusion narrative? I mean, are you listening to yourself right now? Collusion, OK, explain that to me in a none exclusive situation if you please.

I'm not saying that the non-exclusive tag is collusion, I'm saying that is what you want. You were referencing the QB negotiation wars which speaks to the overall picture of teams vs the rising cost of QB contracts. Any effort for teams to collectively combat that is collusion plain and simple.

Now, to your other point, that no one was going to pay DAK the money we did--you have no idea. And if you honestly look at the offer that was on the table for Wilson from Chicago and some of the non-official packages that were being thrown out for Watson, you can see it was likely that a team would have potentially offered both picks and a contract for DAK. We could have ultimately put ourselves in an even poorer leverage situation.

I anticipate that you next argument will be something to do with Dak's relative value vs Wilson and/or Watson, but your biased perception of Dak does not translate to how other owners / GM evaluate him.

Denim Chicken · Mar 23, 2021

JustChip said:
It’s only collusion if the teams conspire together to limit. But it is not collusion if I, as an owner on my own, decide not participate in paying above a certain amount. Of course, if teams decide to do that independently of each other and the market goes down, there’s no doubt the NFLPA will accuse the teams of collusion and file suit. The only solution would be a negotiated system whereby there are caps on individual positions.

This is correct, but there is really no scenario where I see team independently & all at the same time deciding that they will begin to limit QB contracts.

Potentially, we could see it if one team makes a public stance, but then other teams would need to follow in turn and I do not see that happening.

JoeKing · Mar 23, 2021

No! They've been saying all along that Dak is their guy. Being sold on his viability in the future of the team, management should never let him hit the open market. That would send a contrary message to what they had been saying. Dak is their guy! Until you, as a fan buys into that, you're not going to get it.

News: PFT: Should the Cowboys have let Dak Prescott hit the open market?

CouchCoach

Typhus

Captain Catfish

Future

Intramural Legend

JustChip

Well-Known Member

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....

Swagger

Well-Known Member

cowboyec

Well-Known Member

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member

ABQCOWBOY

Regular Joe....

ActualCowboysFan

Well-Known Member

JustChip

Well-Known Member

jaythecowboy

Well-Known Member

Typhus

Captain Catfish

TwoCentPlain

Numbnuts

Future

Intramural Legend

bsbellomy

Well-Known Member

viman96

Thread Killer

Denim Chicken

Well-Known Member

Denim Chicken

Well-Known Member

JoeKing

Diehard