Cowboys need to resign Dak before Baker and Josh Allen reset the market

[Diehardblues]

They don't care to? If you have a big name QB, paying him is an investment. From a business standpoint. What's good for business is not always good for the team. Obviously success is good for business. And a good quarterback provides that. But is a championship really necessary for business? I'll pose a hypothetical. If God came down and told the owner of the Chiefs that they wont win another super bowl in the next 12 years, do you that he wouldn't still sign Mahomes? He sure would.

So what you’re proposing is to release all of these SB caliber QB when their Rookie deal expires because the numbers support how difficult it is to win a SB once paying them?

This is a clear example how fans have taken a stat or fact and spun to support their absurd argument.

It’s not just about the business side of it. It’s about staying with a proven commodity who provides your franchise a consistent competitive contender liking their chances more than starting over with an unproven talent.

This is a QB driven league. These franchise extend resources to land them a franchise QB. The last thing they want to do is look for one every 4 or 5 years. It’s not like in College with unlimited recruiting resources able to stockpile talent.

 

[CouchCoach]

The misconception is that Mahomes sets the market because he's considered the best. The market isn't created or controlled by the best. It is set by how important each specific QB is to their team and it has nothing to do with being compared to Mahomes. There are QB's coming up that will beat Mahomes annual salary.

There are also other factors that owners will consider and don't think popularity like Josh Allen in BUF with those fans isn't important. He has done the almost impossible, rivaled the love those fans have for Jim Kelly.

 

[CouchCoach]

So what you’re proposing is to release all of these SB caliber QB when their Rookie deal expires because the numbers support how difficult it is to win a SB once paying them?

This is a clear example how fans have taken a stat or fact and spun to support their absurd argument.

It’s not just about the business side of it. It’s about staying with a proven commodity who provides your franchise a consistent competitive contender liking their chances more than starting over with an unproven talent.

Winning a SB is overrated. One team will do that and how many good QB's that fill the stands and are the face man for the team are there? Brady has skewed this to where only multiple ring bearers are worthy. Fans in BUF, MIA and MIN would argue with that.

 

[csirl]

Allen >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dak.

 

[Diehardblues]

He went to 9 super bowls with one QB. Yes I count the losses too because that's as far as you can go. And it's really hard just getting to a SB.

Yes but that speaks more to Brady’s and Bills longevity. None of the QB and HC combos of previous eras had as long of run .

Who knows how many SB’s Montana had made if he played with Walsh for as long. Same with Lombardi and Star. What if Roger had played a few more years on both or either sides of his career with Landry. Could he have gone to several more SB’s.

Im not discounting what Bill and Brady accomplished which is arguably greatest combo in history but the fact they were together longer than any other combo is worthy of mentioning.

 

[Diehardblues]

Prescott could sign with another team today - the Cowboys would be all over the sports media headlines --
"What are they doing?! -- --Big mistake!! ----Where do they go from here!?!
"And the next starting Dallas Cowboys QB is...." would garner just as much attention as to where Prescott winds up.
Still "relevant and interesting"

I don’t believe that was all of the intent of Jethro’s comment. He was referring to their competitive nature.

I think he believes his team is more relevant and interesting with Dak because they are a better team with him than without him.

 

[Qcard]

If you think because Mahomes is considered best QB in the league and currently has largest contract that no one can receive a bigger contract , you need to research how the market works in the NFL. Cause that’s certainly not what history reflects.

Mahomes will never fulfill this 10 year contract cause in 3-5 years there will be several QB’s making more because of the market and he’ll want to renegotiate.

Great Post!

 

[Diehardblues]

Winning a SB is overrated. One team will do that and how many good QB's that fill the stands and are the face man for the team are there? Brady has skewed this to where only multiple ring bearers are worthy. Fans in BUF, MIA and MIN would argue with that.

No doubt that’s part of it. Agreed!

But I’d argue teams like the Packers with Rodgers , since that the basis originally of this argument , think or like their chances of returning to the SB after paying him that looking and finding another QB on a Rookie contract who has enough talent to take them to a SB.

Now if we had some data supporting that once teams release these SB caliber QB’s find another QB in draft soon after returning to SB then I think the argument would be sound.

 

[Qcard]

Maybe so. But those QB’s are keeping them contenders . You’re assuming their next QB would. I’m assuming that’s a big part of why they resign their SB QB’s and not releasing them . That’s just not how the league is ever going to work.

They aren’t going to dump QB’s who they’ve had success with for the unknown. Only a HS or college HC would have such a mentality because that’s what they have to do. But in Cap era it might be a reasonable solution. Just can’t see it happening.

Basically you’re recommending releasing all of the top QB’s after their Rookie contract especially if they’ve won a SB.

 

[Diehardblues]

I'm actually not assuming anything. You're assuming that I'm assuming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't know how this will turn out, but I do know that capstrapping contracts for your QB keeps you from winning it all. Flacco, Rodgers, Wilson, Rothy, all got paid and the super bowls stopped.

Again, I’m not disputing that fact. My argument is about did they remain a more serious contender with them ?

Would they have remained as serious a contender if they released their SB depending on finding another one in draft. Which seems like a more uncertain or riskier approach than going with a proven overpaid commodity.

Is there any evidence that releasing a SB caliber cause of Cap places teams in better position to return to the SB without them while searching for another QB ?

 

[Ranched]

 

[BigStar]

Please list all of the stupid teams who draft new franchise QB’s every 4 or 5 years .

Think he meant draft one until you find a franchise qb, don't pay a good qb franchise money.

 

[Diehardblues]

Think he meant draft one until you find a franchise qb, don't pay a good qb franchise money.

Can we even imagine a league that releases these SB caliber QB’s.

I can see them at the press conference. Sorry folks. We might suk for a few years until we can find another QB but the data says you can’t win a SB with a QB after his Rookie QB. Thanks .. lol

 

[MWH1967]

Same old song and dance...

 

[Jipper]

If the salary cap contracts then teams aren’t going to be able to afford 40 to 50 mil which is well over a quarter of the salary cap for 1 player....

A lot depends on what happens with the salary cap, if it comes in close to the 170m mark that is being thrown around teams are going to have to think very hard about contracts.

 

[BigStar]

Can we even imagine a league that releases these SB caliber QB’s.

I can see them at the press conference. Sorry folks. We might suk for a few years until we can find another QB but the data says you can’t win a SB with a QB after his Rookie QB. Thanks .. lol

Only if they aren't seen as the franchise QB. Like Dak is 50/50 split on those thinking he has it. I think you're saying ridiculous just to move on, just to move on if the team hasn't won a SB. If he was a Herbert type talent, fans would be willing to spend more and show more patience.

for ex: if a Herbert doesn't win one in 5 years, just move on bc that was the time to win? If it's obv the talent is there but the team hasn't been good enough, you still re-sign bc he's an asset. We would say there would be no issue with signing Herbert to the big/max deal bc he pulls his team up. (All hypothetical, he's just the new in QB so used him)

The Trent Dilfer SB QBs or the Brady SB QBs? They would get Trent Dilfer not getting a big deal, etc.

 

[CATCH17]

That pendulum can swing back the other way quickly. Most of the attention goes to Mahomes, Allen, Murray, Burrow and Herbert but there's still Darnold, Bortles, Trubisky and Rosen to consider.

Every team must consider the upside of a new QB better than what they have. The Jets have to decide that now. It is different for a team like ATL where Ryan is winding down or other teams facing a changing of the guard.

Are any of the QB's they could take at 10 better than what they have?

Every position busts..

Just cut the guy and draft another. Just like Arizona did with Rosen.

 

[Sandyf]

Don’t be stupid because other teams are stupid..

Drafting QBs is the way to go.

Sure it is if you want to finish in the middle of the pack every year and never reach the playoffs. Guess some fans want us to be the NY Jets or Jacksonville Jags.

 

[Diehardblues]

I think you're saying for ex: if a Herbert doesn't win one in 5 years, just move on bc that was the time to win? If it's obv the talent is there but the team hasn't been good enough, you still re-sign bc he's an asset. We would say there would be no issue with signing Herbert to the big/max deal bc he pulls his team up. (All hypothetical, he's just the new in QB so used him)

The Trent Dilfer SB QBs or the Brady SB QBs? They would get Trent Dilfer not getting a big deal, etc.

No, I’m saying like when Rodgers, Brees and Rothleisburger contracts for example came up after winning SB we’d say, sorry fans , no use resigning these guys cause can’t win another SB with them now.

 

[BigStar]

No, I’m saying like when Rodgers, Brees and Rothleisburger contracts for example came up after winning SB we’d say, sorry fans , no use resigning these guys cause can’t win another SB with them now.

Yeah my b, I edited after I caught on. I think the gap is that "if" they are seen as franchise QBs, you're willing to continue on and spend whatever is needed. There is not that consensus with Dak that he's top 5, worthy of big money. The only justification I've seen is that his bad contract will catch up with itself due to league trends. I would re-sign Allen to what Dak wants, etc.

Brad Johnson/Trent Dilfer SB winning QBs would be let go after the SB. Dak is nowhere that bad, but more as interchangeable. Pats/Packers/Cheifs fans don't see their QB as interchangeable. Dak has one really great win against SEA in the playoffs, that's the only game I can think of that I feel Dak elevated the tea; he then went on to crap the bed the following year and missed the playoffs in the do or die game against PHI.

He's really stuck in the middle but we have to pay him top money to keep him. Causes all this tension up in here