Can The Cowboys Sign 4 Stars to New Contracts?

big dog cowboy said:
Actually the Cowboys could find all kinds of cap space if they signed Dak to what he is really worth instead of giving him an extension making him a top 5 or worse a top 3 paid QB.
Click to expand...
Stephen has implied Dak's extension won't be anywhere near as hard as getting his current deal coz most of the $$$$ is already baked into the budget.

BTW....I'm 100% sure Dak will NOT sign as an extension of anything below top 5 pay. He may not demand the top 3 but the top 5........count on it.
 
Jipper said:
The question with this team has never been about resigning stars...it's about structuring contracts such that we're not just top heavy but also have some decent depth.

We are getting better primarily bc we are drafting so well but have work to do still
Click to expand...
We are getting better because we finally got a coach who knows how to build a team. A light bulb didn't suddenly go off in Jerry's, Stephen's and Mclays head.
 
Jipper said:
to a point yes but not at a point that its prohibitive to build a team with enough depth to compete...in the past, we have never had an issue with stars being resigned - there really isn't one that comes to mind that we didnt resign and let walk...the problem has been on the backend with having bad contracts for stars that go past their prime and then we are handicapped. Letting zeke go early was a great move in the right direction, it doesn't make up for the bad contract, but it shows they are starting to change the way that they approach contracts.
Click to expand...
Well with the Zeke thing I get it. Many will say it was a mistake to sign him but it was a year we felt we had a chance at winning and having Zeke was our best shot at winning.

I think in the past the issue has been drafting depth. Missing on certain picks has hurt their depth. Now they've managed to fill their roster with guys like Kearse and Malik Hooker. They've done a good job of mixing the draft, with good cheap signings.
 
darthseinfeld said:
You could make a case for Byron Jones, but Im not sure they actually wanted to keep him. They said they did, but there was possibly lip service
Click to expand...
I don't think they wanted to keep Byron Jones ... they did not think he was a ball hawk and could not create turnovers .... all he knew was knocking the ball to the ground per
pass breakups.

- One year wonder that saw him surprisingly make All Pro.(under Kris Richard) . despite zero INTs.

- Cowboys were never serious about re-signing him and allowed him to walk to Miami - where they made him the NFL's highest paid CB..
Needless to say Byron never came close to fulfilling that contract.
 
Yes, they can re-sign those 4 core players ... and they will re-sign those core players..

- One more core player is currently under the franchise tag, and this will be an audition year as the new featured starter at RB.

- They have options of moving and re-structing current and existing contracts around, ..
.Plus it's expected that the NFL team salary cap will rise more, ...with all the revenues that these new TV rights deals that are setting or will set to kick in.
 
No matter what anyone says, Dak will be resigned. So the question really is can we pay Dak 50 million and sign Parsons and CD and Diggs and still field a team strong in other areas?

IMO, the answer is NO

I’ve said this before, sign Parsons and CD and trade Diggs

Real teams are strong at OL and DL
Spend the money saved by trading Diggs in those areas

I stand by that
 
What is the negotiating strategy behind signing Prescott with 2 years left on his contract?

Cheaper than waiting a year?

Or Prescott won‘t sign a cheaper, current market contract, but wants a higher, 2025 pay locked in now?

if he signs now, does he still receive pay per his current contract? Will his future bonus be guaranteed?

Does the team have a confidential do not sign after this date metric on each player?

Would they likely think Prescott will decline after he turns 36, for example? I assume Prescott thinks his expiration date is in his 40s.
 
fivetwos said:
I have no issue with Diggs, but if Bland continues to progress, they are right about Scott, guys like Gilmore can be had for a late round pick, just maybe they can squeeze something out of Joseph/Wright, and veteran depth like Lewis/Brown are around….is it not good business to let him go and spend that money elsewhere?

They consider him a cornerstone and are proud of the pick, so they won’t let him walk, but it may not be the best allocation of cap dollars. They will absolutely lose other players if they pay Diggs.
Click to expand...
That is always the decision. Maybe you are right and maybe you are wrong, but a lot has to go right there just to be NFL average.
Bland: great surprise and looks like a player but hasn't even played a full season yet. If he becomes even better should we get rid of him also?
Scott: I think the fact that the 2nd guy you mentioned is a 6th round rookie tells the story. Odds say it's a much better chance he never becomes more than a ST'er than he starts regularly at CB. This is a reach.
Gilmore: It's not like he is cheap either. He costs us $10M for 1 year and is 33 years old in a couple of months. I think he is a player and maybe better than Diggs even at this stage, but it's also possible it wasn't the injuries and he is on a steep decline at this point of his career.
Lewis/Brown: All I read on here was complaints about those two and all they are now is a little older and a lot more injured. I'm not even sure Brown plays in the NFL this year. And Lewis, Brown and Gilmore combined probably cost $20M per year.

The issue is that other than Gilmore all of these guys are #2 types at best. You want to win a SB you need stars. Maybe that is Diggs and maybe it isn't, but you don't win by getting rid of guys who have played 3 seasons and have a 1st team All Pro and 2 Pro Bowls to their name for a bunch of question marks at a key position. I don't think we will lose anyone we don't want to lose with or without Diggs but you do have to make choices in a cap world. In an ideal world Bland and Scott both become elite starters, but is that really likely? If Diggs doesn't get extended this offseason (I think he will) and we roll the dice I have no issue moving on if those things you mentioned all come through. But then we can't complain when he costs us $2M more per year due to inflation either if they don't. Why do we want to dismantle the good things we have? After reading multiple people talk about how getting rid of Micah is a good idea I just realize my idea of building a successful football team and other people's are two completely different things...
 
IMO Dak is the one you hold off on. I think the others are all definite top 10 at their respective positions and you can argue top 5 for CeeDee, top overall for Micah and Maybe 5 to 10 for Diggs. Offsetting this is the fact that QB is the most important position of course. But, the reason I say hold off is because Dak has two more years and when a guy has two years left and the most compelling argument to re-sign him to an even much bigger contract is because his current cap hit is too high, that is telling. You should extend Dak because he is worth the $50M he wants not because his previous contract is now become difficult to fit under the cap because it's a sunk cost and every penny of it will hit the cap anyway, it's just a matter of when. Dak has had some top 10 years (maybe a couple of top 5 years or at least close) and some years that were not nearly that good including the most recent and the most recent is the most important when evaluating players. He is also going to be 30 before the season starts so an extension takes him to about 35ish depending on the deal. He is also coming off of some injuries the last few seasons. IMO Dak is playing for his next deal this season. He is on the cusp of it but needs to prove that for the next 6 or 7 years (current deal plus extension) he is worth that huge deal. I think he has a bounce back year and we sign him after this season to a monster deal, but I just think the smart move is to wait it out for at least one more year and maybe even two.
 
Sometimes fans will say it's better to sign now because later it will be more costly etc. Yes that's probably true, but that doesn't take into account what can happen between now and later.
 
dak is no tag/no trade. so Jerry has no leverage.

you can go 5th year option/tag/tag on CD and Micah. They'll be used up by then.

I'd go tag/tag on Diggs.
 
This situation was supposed to be Jerry's strong point. As one agent once put it, "Jerry is a deal maker, not a deal breaker."

Jerry has always been known as someone who can find imaginative ways around certain NFL policies. I'm sure it will be elaborate but I'm fairly cetain the Cowboys will be able to do it.
 
DuncanIso said:
dak is no tag/no trade. so Jerry has no leverage.

you can go 5th year option/tag/tag on CD and Micah. They'll be used up by then.

I'd go tag/tag on Diggs.
Click to expand...
Teams are built as much on trust as pride...works both ways also.
 
I'm no capologist... As vital as that part of pro football is, I just never found it interesting.

Off my head, though, we don't really have any big long-term contracts on the books right now, save for Dak and Martin.
  • Tyron is nearly done.... see you in Canton, buddy.
  • Zeke is gone, although it will take a year or two to eat his cap hits.
  • Gallup's expensive, but is running into a void year.
  • DLaw has one more expensive year left after 2023. He shouldn't interfere with big extensions.
  • Our linebackers are all cheap. Keeping LVE for 2 years/$12M was a steal.
  • Our DBs are all cheap. Kearse plays super cheap. Hooker plays super cheap. Wilson is kind of pricey, but he's worth it.

We have a lot of guys to pay, but we should have plenty of cap space to make it happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 66 more.
Total: 5,478 (members: 166, guests: 5,312)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
465,163
Messages
13,855,459
Members
23,788
Latest member
mattyice
Back
Top