Are You For Dak’s New Contract?

[VaqueroTD]

This thread = throwing a bone to the Dak Haters for old time's sake.

He keeps playing like he has this year, new contract is a no brainer.

Biggest worry is only can he stay healthy. He runs again, is past 30, and 2 great O-Linemen who are starting to get up there in age.

But that's why we have Trey Lance in the back pocket.

 

[rambo2]

So there is talk of extending and giving Dak a new contract. Are you for this or against this?

With Dak at the top of his game, of course he will get a new contract and it's good for the Cowboys.

 

[817Gill]

They could hope to land a high end QB also. It’s not like Cincinnati was some powerhouse before Burrow. Some of you are too addicted to being a bridesmaid to the point it’s between bridesmaid or dysfunctional prostitute. The fact that Purdy is playing as well as he is proves teams must establish high end lines of scrimmage and they can make do with okay talent.

I don’t understand when people try to suggest building the team in the image of one unique team. People tried to do this with the Pats all the time. Can’t use them as an example unless you have the equivalent of Belichek and Brady on your team.

No one can replicate San Fran’s style because no one has that combination of coaching on both sides of the ball and front office excellence. They draft well, make star studded in-season trades, and have elite coaching schematically.

These are extremely hard to do in unison and thus why no other team has been able to replicate the “amazing roster solid cheap QB” method. Additionally, it hasn’t resulted in a SB yet. So we’ll see if the QB is ultimately what holds them back ala Jimmy G.

Letting go of a top 8 QB to try to build a team as San Fran would with our culture, FO, and coaching makes no sense. Not saying we have a poor staff or FO, but we are not them and we aren’t built like them. Take certain elements such as building from the inside out, but don’t blown it up and think you’re gonna be able to create a San Fran south.

 

[rambo2]

Exactly.

I think he gets cut in March. Post June cut.

They save tons of $$$ in the cap.

Roll out Lance and draft a RB in the 1st.

They aren't cutting him. The team is one of the best in the league and they will contend again next year.

 

[blueblood70]

They aren't cutting him. The team is one of the best in the league and they will contend again next year.

Wow there's a reason I have that guy blocked but just to his idiotic post here's my reply you're right no they will not cut him more than likely they sign him but the best thing to do if you really want to part ways with the guy is let him seek out a trade he has a no trade clause but if he is allowed to pick the team and that team knows what contract he's asking for and we'll meet those demands then you can at least get a high draft pick for him people here think prescotts worthless are you kidding me they would at least give you 2 firsts for dak or at least a one and two twos that is a fact he is still that good I mean you need any proof just Sean Watson got his deal on suspension Russell Wilson got his deal after a bad year and the same goes for declining Aaron Rodgers got over there with The Jets..

Prescott may not demand that much compensation because the team knows you there's a no trade clause so it limits who you can trade to but for sure there's a team out there I don't know say the Chicago Bears just off the top of my head as one of the teams that would love to have a Prescott on that team because they're already putting pieces in place to make all three phases of their game better I mean you got DJ Moore and sweat on defense they gonna have the top pick in the draft they can add an offensive lineman I mean that'd be a great place for Prescott...

I'm sure there's others I just can't think of it off the top of my head because it's not really gonna be a possibility but you don't cut a guy when you can get compensation for him big compensation and I don't even know what the cat hits supposed to be even if we cut him in after June 1st next year I bet we're still owe him about $29 million against the cap

 

[817Gill]

I would sign Micah and CeeDee first and see what we have left over.

Dak has been playing lights out since the 49'ers game, as we all know. Problem is that Dak has a history of bi-polar play.

For those that say we have to resign because of his 60 million dollar cap hit next year, well what do you think he will be asking for going forward? I would say at least 60 million/year. If you backload the contract we could hit a year where his cap hit is 80 or 90 million. Not Dak's fault, but the market for QB's to high.

I don’t think y’all understand how the league works. You don’t go all in and sign all-pro players with no QB. Why would you pay big money to elite players without them having even a chance to be competitive?

Unless there’s a clear and obvious QB upgrade (there rarely is), you don’t sign Micah and Ceedee just to roll out an unproven or flat out bad QB. If you’re not re-signing Dak then you don’t re-sign anyone. You trade away all the big name high money guys and blow it up. Collect a bunch of draft capital and cap space and try to move up for a top QB and sign some FA’s once that’s done.

You can’t mix blowing it up and contending, they’re two completely different strategies. Makes absolutely no sense to sign your top players without a proven QB to steer the ship.

 

[817Gill]

I never said anything about Dak getting some kind of “Tom Brady” team friendly contract for several reasons.

1. Brady’s last two contracts were extremely mischaracterized in their “team friendliness.“
2. I firmly believe Dak (and any other NFL player) should get paid what the market dictates, not what fans think they are worth. I side with the player almost 100% of the time they are getting paid because they are the THE centerpiece of the game, not the owners.
3. Most people saying a player should take a “team friendly” contract do not seem to understand how the cap works and how it can be manipulated through savvy management.

Beautiful post

 

[817Gill]

If you don't want to extend him then you want to tank next year.

There is no middle ground there.

Exactly lol. Dudes talking about re-signing Lamb and Parsons but letting Dak walk. Completely counter-intuitive.

 

[Bobhaze]

I don’t think y’all understand how the league works. You don’t go all in and sign all-pro players with no QB. Why would you pay big money to elite players without them having even a chance to be competitive?

Unless there’s a clear and obvious QB upgrade (there rarely is), you don’t sign Micah and Ceedee just to roll out an unproven or flat out bad QB. If you’re not re-signing Dak then you don’t re-sign anyone. You trade away all the big name high money guys and blow it up. Collect a bunch of draft capital and cap space and try to move up for a top QB and sign some FA’s once that’s done.

You can’t mix blowing it up and contending, they’re two completely different strategies. Makes absolutely no sense to sign your top players without a proven QB to steer the ship.

This ^^^

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

Exactly lol. Dudes talking about re-signing Lamb and Parsons but letting Dak walk. Completely counter-intuitive.

Not to mention that you'd still be paying more cap dollars than just about every team in the league to roll with Trey Lance and, like, Baker Mayfield.

 

[SwagSurfer]

He's going to sign. Makes no sense not to. If we choose to go with unproven Lance or another run of the mill QB we're setting ourselves up for failure.

 

[nightrain]

What's the alternative? Yes is the answer.

 

[nate dizzle]

Why do we act like Dak hasn’t already gotten a mega deal lol? We had no issue building good teams after signing him, in fact they’re better than most of the teams he had on his rookie deal.

You think we’re suddenly going to forget how to build a roster? Your post is acting as if Dak’s been on a cheap deal his whole career, he was the second highest paid QB at one point lol.

You're right, no idea what I'm worried about. We've shown we can build championship teams...

 

[817Gill]

Not to mention that you'd still be paying more cap dollars than just about every team in the league to roll with Trey Lance and, like, Baker Mayfield.

It’s just silly lol. We’ve also shown we can build competitive teams with a high priced QB. We just need to make one or two more moves as a FO in order to be a dominant all-in team.

People taking responsibility away from FO’s makes no sense to me. Since when do they have no pressure to make cap moves and bring in guys? It’s all doable, just need an aggressive and calculated FO.

We’re there draft wise and do a good job of finding bargains here and there in FA or trade market. We just need to make a realistic splash or two per season to take us over the edge.

 

[Rockport]

So there is talk of extending and giving Dak a new contract. Are you for this or against this?

Yes, and so is Jerry so case closed.

 

[Rockport]

You're right, no idea what I'm worried about. We've shown we can build championship teams...

Every thread you’re in being your usual negative self. Get out more and enjoy life. Maybe you wouldn’t be so miserable all the time. Cowboys are 9-3 and on a roll and all you can do is *****.

 

[817Gill]

You're right, no idea what I'm worried about. We've shown we can build championship teams...

Man we just went 12-5 back to back years and are on track for another. Losing to the most talented roster in football in the playoffs doesn’t mean we can’t build good teams lol.

Dak’s contract hasn’t stopped us from putting top 3 NFC rosters on the field, we’re one of the best teams in the league right now.

Regardless, the cap is a myth man. Look at how Philly and San Fran operate and have operated for years. Both have had high paid QB’s (Jimmy G was one of the top when he got paid) and both have had cheap QB’s. Has no bearing on if they have top tier rosters because the FO, you know the guys responsible for building teams and manipulating the cap, do their job.

Paying a top 10 QB is not inherently an obstacle, it’s the FO and their ability to do their job at a high level that is imperative. They’ve done well so far, but are still a class below the best of the best. None of that gets better with Dak gone, in fact the likelihood is it gets a whole lot worse.

 

[Hadenough]

It all depends on what I want. If I want to win a SB Dak is outta here. If it's all about business and just being competitive sure sign him. The NFL is entertainment and Dak puts people in the stands. But they should consider letting some of these players walk to make room for Dak. Parsons and Lamb and Diggs and throw in Bland and Lawrence. Because if the sign those guys this team will have guys on the street for depth.

 

[Bobhaze]

To me, the whole “pro-Dak”, “anti-Dak“ argument is not only exhausting, IMO it also fundamentally misses the most important thing for me- winning. I’m pro-winning and I’m for whoever gives us the best chance to win playoff games now and in the near future. You can’t even compete for a SB these days without a good QB. Doesn’t have to be HOFer, but you can’t win a Lombardi without at least a solid QB.

If we want to win NOW, Having a known good QB is infinitely better than rolling the dice with a complete wild card unknown (like Lance) or a drafted college stud who has at best 50% chance of ever being good. Why roll the dice with an unknown? Finding even a decent QB in this league is so hard, that alone is what is driving the QB market to be so high. It is just the cost of being competitive in the NFL today,

As it stands right now, Dak is easily a top ten QB in this league who is playing at a very high level. Do I think he’s in the Mahomes stratosphere? No. Do I think he can carry a team by himself? No. Do I believe he can lead a team to multiple playoff wins? Yes. But not by himself. It will take a team playing well, not just the QB.

And I don’t care about the cap anymore. Teams winning SBs these days are led by a front office that finds creative ways to make the cap work. We can too.

 

[32BellyOption]

So there is talk of extending and giving Dak a new contract. Are you for this or against this?

Idk until I hear the terms.