Are you happy we signed Dak

[ABQCOWBOY]

Dak Prescott signed a six-year, $164 million deal. 2. Years five and six on the contract are voidable to help the Cowboys manage their salary cap in the future. So, in conclusion, it's a four-year deal.17 hours ago

I wonder if this helps to spread out the year 4 cap hit? Wasn't that the intent of voidable years?

That's my understanding, so essentially, we would have more years but what it really means is that in year three, we will be back at this for even more money. Seriously, this is a horrible deal IMO. No leverage, no trade clause, no tag option. This is very bad guys. I know everybody loves this deal but as I said before, if Dak plays well, we are going to be paying a huge amount with no recourse. If he plays poorly, it's wasted money with a significant amount of dead cap space for additional years with nothing to show for it.

This is a bad deal. Now, I know it's much easier to just say that people who don't like this deal have ulterior motives but anybody who really pays attention, this is not a good deal IMO and it all about finances. This is what you get when you can't walk away from a deal.

It's done now.

 

[nobody]

This is a tough one. I'm happy he's a Cowboy. There are a lot of issues this team has to overcome before they can sniff a championship. Overpaying him isn't going to help and so I'm annoyed that they caved...again. The current cast emphatically proved they can't get it done as is even with Dak at the helm so they need a talent infusion. How can they afford that if they keep overpaying players that quite frankly aren't as good as Jerry and some fans think?

Don't get me wrong, Dak's top 10 and that's good enough, but Jerry's habit of overpaying is one of the reasons that this team doesn't succeed under Jerry.

Fortunately, his cap hit isn't bad for this coming season, but it will go up, which is how the Cowboys got into Salary cap issues before. Restructures were constantly needed and just kicked the can down the road.

So I'm happy Dak's a Cowboy, but he was overpaid and that'll hurt the team in the long-term. I voted yes.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Not sure, but from everything I see we can get out in 2024 with $26M dead which is not crazy bad.

How are we going to get out of this in year 3? Seriously, how do you see us doing that? BTW, 26M is bad, not good.

So under this scenario, you are planning on getting out after three seasons, and taking a cap hit of 26M but that would mean that we either need to draft a starting QB this year or that we are going to go out and sign somebody to play QB so what is that gonna cost?

So you would have the salary of the QB we sign and the 26 mil or the draft pick investment plus the dead cap amount and whatever it costs for the rookie salary on the books. Still, I don't see the bargain in either one of those options but again, do you really see that happening after three years? We could have done that with Romo but we didn't. Instead, we spent good money after bad and ended up signing another bad deal as a direct result of the first deal signed.

 

[Denim Chicken]

How are we going to get out of this in year 3? Seriously, how do you see us doing that? BTW, 26M is bad, not good.

So under this scenario, you are planning on getting out after three seasons, and taking a cap hit of 26M but that would mean that we either need to draft a starting QB this year or that we are going to go out and sign somebody to play QB so what is that gonna cost?

So you would have the salary of the QB we sign and the 26 mil or the draft pick investment plus the dead cap amount and whatever it costs for the rookie salary on the books. Still, I don't see the bargain in either one of those options but again, do you really see that happening after three years? We could have done that with Romo but we didn't. Instead, we spent good money after bad and ended up signing another bad deal as a direct result of the first deal signed.

I mean it's all dependent on his play in the next three years. If he performs, it's an extension. If not, you bite the bullet and pay the dead money.

We've been there before. A few teams are there now. It sucks, but it only lasts a year, and the cap will be much higher as well which will help mitigate the impact. Y

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I’d explain it to you again but what’s the point? You got your golden calf. Now let’s see if he can actually deliver anything outside of an 8-8 season. Something tells me that I’ll be still laughing at Jerry’s misery after 4 years.

I mean you are going to laugh regardless at anything short of a Super Bowl win....

That being said, Dak has only had 8-8 seasons ONCE in his career....just saying....

 

[5Stars]

Sometimes you're the baseball, sometime you're the bat. In this case, Dak is the bat, and the team is the baseball.

 

[CWR]

That's my understanding, so essentially, we would have more years but what it really means is that in year three, we will be back at this for even more money. Seriously, this is a horrible deal IMO. No leverage, no trade clause, no tag option. This is very bad guys. I know everybody loves this deal but as I said before, if Dak plays well, we are going to be paying a huge amount with no recourse. If he plays poorly, it's wasted money with a significant amount of dead cap space for additional years with nothing to show for it.

This is a bad deal. Now, I know it's much easier to just say that people who don't like this deal have ulterior motives but anybody who really pays attention, this is not a good deal IMO and it all about finances. This is what you get when you can't walk away from a deal.

It's done now.

Yeah I understand we are back to the negotiation table after year 3 IF we want to extend Dak.

My question is if we choose to part ways can we spread the dead money out over year 5 and 6 as well?

I think the worst part of the contract is the no tag no trade option.

We are relying on the cap to increase as well. It will and I believe we will be able to maneuver around these numbers. The question was always do you re-sign Dak or do you blow the whole thing up? It would've been a lot of wasted talent had we went the other route.

 

[Aulac]

No horrible deal. We weren't going anywhere with him and now we won't be doing anything for the next 4 years minimal. Did people forget he got an ACL injury which mean he less athletic now than before the injury. Look what the ACL did to Wentz. Yuck, awful deal, feel sick to my stomach!

 

[5Stars]

No horrible deal. We weren't going anywhere with him and now we won't be doing anything for the next 4 years minimal. Did people forget he got an ACL injury which mean he less athletic now than before the injury. Look what the ACL did to Wentz. Yuck, awful deal, feel sick to my stomach!

Well, I guess the doctors convinced JJ that Dak will be alright. I'm not so sure...he is going to be hesitant to take off running anymore.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I mean it's all dependent on his play in the next three years. If he performs, it's an extension. If not, you bite the bullet and pay the dead money.

We've been there before. A few teams are there now. It sucks, but it only lasts a year, and the cap will be much higher as well which will help mitigate the impact. Y

Yes but on the extension, the Cowboys are locked in to paying whatever Dak and his agent want because of the way this contract was written. The team is seriously screwed.

We don't know what the cap will be then. Nobody can say how much of an increase we see in three years.

 

[Winonesoon]

 

[5Stars]

Yes but on the extension, the Cowboys are locked in to paying whatever Dak and his agent want because of the way this contract was written. The team is seriously screwed.

We don't know what the cap will be then. Nobody can say how much of an increase we see in three years.

The part of the contract that I was not really liking? The No Trade Clause.

I have nothing to do with the money, but I do understand how it is going to be detrimental to the rest of the tea.

 

[Hardline]

Dak Fans....Yes
Cowboys fans .... No.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yeah I understand we are back to the negotiation table after year 3 IF we want to extend Dak.

My question is if we choose to part ways can we spread the dead money out over year 5 and 6 as well?

I think the worst part of the contract is the no tag no trade option.

We are relying on the cap to increase as well. It will and I believe we will be able to maneuver around these numbers. The question was always do you re-sign Dak or do you blow the whole thing up? It would've been a lot of wasted talent had we went the other route.

Yes, I believe that this is how the contract was constructed. At least a large majority of the deal can be spread out over multiple years because it will be converted into signing bonus but seriously, I don't see Jerry stepping away from Dak, even if Dak hasn't won anything. If Dak goes .500, Jerry will still resign him at any cost. He did it with Romo and he will do it with Prescott IMO. We're gonna get screwed.

 

[john van brocklin]

Yes or no

So happy the drama is over!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[buybuydandavis]

Yes or no

I would have preferred that we take a strategy of development of young QBs for years, but we didn't. We left ourselves with no option. If we're taking the sign the franchise QB strategy instead, Dak is a fine one, and the money is fine too.

 

[eastsideboy]

That depends how mutch money is he going to give me Otherwise it doesn't really affect my life.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The part of the contract that I was not really liking? The No Trade Clause.

I have nothing to do with the money, but I do understand how it is going to be detrimental to the rest of the tea.

Yes Sir!

 

[Ranching]

Yup....

 

[Denim Chicken]

I have nothing to do with the money, but I do understand how it is going to be detrimental to the rest of the tea.

How?