Dak Hater's Myth: We Can't Build Around a QB Market Value Contract

[cern]

I know and understand that because you have zero knowledge and understanding of the cap that anything I say will sound that way. I know you can't help it, wait, yes you could if you actually tried to learn something about the cap and what GOOD cap management is.
.

I agree with you, gk. continually renegotiating and deferring money down the road leads to cap hell. it's an ok strategy if the player continues to produce. but if he doesn't and is released, you end up paying for those no longer on your roster. it took Stephen 4 years to get us out of the cap hell jerry got us into. that is why Stephen tends to be somewhat parsimonious in dealing with contracts. in the end, it's the wisest way to go.

 

[eromeopolk]

Please all you Dak Hater's I kindly ask you answer 2 questions

1. Which players did we lose to Free Agency because of Tony Romo's Market Value setting contract?

2. Which players on the roster will we lose that we would have wanted to keep if we sign Dak to Market Value Contract.


Thank you!

When Dak Prescott gave the Dallas Cowboys 4 years of hometown discount and Jerry Jones let 4 starters on the Cheifs Super Bowl Defense leave in free agency, let the starting OG, DT, SS, and both CBs walk in free agency, cut his no.1 WR, let his no. 1 TE retire, Todd France said to Dak..."go get your money Lil duffel bag boy"...

I will keep posting this reply every time people forget what Jerry did with his hometown discount for Dak Prescott.

 

[OmerV]

I agree that Wentz did nothing in the Superbowl itself as he didn't play but he helped the team get there. Foles was God awful against the Falcons but home field advantage and the defense carried him through before he started to ball out. We have seen that Foles isn't a QB that can perform to a consistently high level over a season otherwise he would have been a regular starter many years back. With him under centre then the Eagles would not have even reached the Superbowl in the first instance, i.e. for a start they wouldn't have had home field advantage in the play offs. So Wentz did contribute towards the actual Superbowl win without even playing in the game.

As we know from both Romo and Dak .. and Danny White … having great regular season stats and contributing to getting to the playoffs doesn't get you credit for being a Super Bowl winning QB. You have to complete the job by by putting up stats and contributing to winning playoff games and the Super Bowl to get that distinction. Nobody gets credit for it based on a projection that "he could have done it".

As for Foles, whileit's true he didn't have a great game against Atlanta, it's a significant exaggeration to say he was "God awful". He completed 77% of his passes, and while he didn't throw a TD pass, neither did he throw an INT. He did, however, have truly great games in the NFC Championship and Super Bowl - games so big you simply can't assume Wentz would have had.

 

[Kaiser]

When Dak Prescott gave the Dallas Cowboys 4 years of hometown discount and Jerry Jones let 4 starters on the Cheifs Super Bowl Defense leave in free agency,

Wrong on multiple levels. Dallas was smart to turn 4th round draft picks into starting seasons of Anthony Hitchens and Damien Wilson. And if you wanted to top the KC offers to those guys and start them over LVE, you are the only one on Earth to do it.

Ward was a UDFA that Dallas signed over every other team and then traded for a quality backup OG (who then got hurt). And if the 4th starter you are talking about is Morris Claiborne, you are the also the only one who wanted that guy.

 

[Swagger]

You are not addressing my point at all. You state that Dak Prescott "has always had, at the very least," a good team around him. How was that possible if Tony Romo's massive contract was still on the books?

The argument is that if Dak is given market rate money...then we cannot have a good team surrounding Dak...okay...then how did we give Tony Romo a massive contract (market rate) and yet he had a good team around him in 2016? So much so that the argument goes "Dak Prescott stepped into the most talented team ever."

It is complete contradictory nonsense.

Romo had an excellent offense in 2014, central to that was the offensive line built through the draft. The defense was average especially as our best defender Sean Lee missed the entire season.

The front offices' drafting and cap management has improved massively over the past 5-6 years - Prescott has been the quarterback to benefit.

There was a ton of dead money back in the day but to their credit, the front office has really improved in that regard.

Further, Romo's contract hit along with Prescott's rookie contract weren't as bad as people make out.

The point is that the offensive line is getting older and it's open to debate whether we will continually hit with our draft picks.

If we let Byron Jones walk then the cornerback position will need addressing for a start.

As we know from both Romo and Dak .. and Danny White … having great regular season stats and contributing to getting to the playoffs doesn't get you credit for being a Super Bowl winning QB. You have to complete the job by by putting up stats and contributing to winning playoff games and the Super Bowl to get that distinction. Nobody gets credit for it based on a projection that "he could have done it".

As for Foles, whileit's true he didn't have a great game against Atlanta, it's a significant exaggeration to say he was "God awful". He completed 77% of his passes, and while he didn't throw a TD pass, neither did he throw an INT. He did, however, have truly great games in the NFC Championship and Super Bowl - games so big you simply can't assume Wentz would have had.

The defense carried Foles vs the Falcons.

I'm not claiming Wentz did anything in the post seasonas he was injured.

I stand by my assertion that the Eagles would not have had home field advantage in the play offs and may not have even reached the post season if Foles played throughout the regular season. The way Foles and the offense plays in the first play off game they get beat away.

 

[Aviano90]

I agree with you, gk. continually renegotiating and deferring money down the road leads to cap hell. it's an ok strategy if the player continues to produce. but if he doesn't and is released, you end up paying for those no longer on your roster. it took Stephen 4 years to get us out of the cap hell jerry got us into. that is why Stephen tends to be somewhat parsimonious in dealing with contracts. in the end, it's the wisest way to go.

There is a difference between continually doing it and never doing it. It's OK to do it sometimes. If we would have signed Earl Thomas, it would not have killed our cap, as an example.

I agreed with y'alls philosophy when we were in "cap hell". We haven't been in cap hell the last couple of years but the team can't just be afraid to bring in a top talent to help potentially push the team to the top. If they are afraid, then our favorable cap situation is just as useless as being in cap hell.

 

[cern]

There is a difference between continually doing it and never doing it. It's OK to do it sometimes. If we would have signed Earl Thomas, it would not have killed our cap, as an example.

Jerry overdid it and it bit him on his heiney. The key is that the players produce down the line. Too bad we didn't get earl thomas.

 

[OmerV]

The defense carried Foles vs the Falcons.

I'm not claiming Wentz did anything in the post seasonas he was injured.

I stand by my assertion that the Eagles would not have had home field advantage in the play offs and may not have even reached the post season if Foles played throughout the regular season. The way Foles and the offense plays in the first play off game they get beat away.

Again, I acknowledged Foles didn't have a great game against the Falcons, but it was not the disaster game you indicated. In any case, that was just one of the games in the playoffs that year.

I didn't indicate that you claimed Wentz did anything in the playoffs that year, so I don't understand you commenting as if I did. But you are clearly attempting to suggest he would have been able to do what Foles did in the playoffs that year in an effort to give him some degree of credit for being a Super Bowl winning QB. My point is that while it could reasonably be assumed that Wentz would have duplicated or even improved upon Foles performance against the Falcons had he been healthy, you cannot assume he would have duplicated or improved upon Foles' performance against Minn. and NE, therefore you cannot give him anything like credit for being a Super Bowl winning QB. The truth is he has proven to be a division winner, just like Dak has. Playoffs are an unknown with Wentz.

 

[Aviano90]

Jerry overdid it and it bit him on his heiney. The key is that the players produce down the line. Too bad we didn't get earl thomas.

It's just like we've went from one extreme to the other. Like middle ground has to be avoided at all cost.

 

[Kaiser]

It's just like we've went from one extreme to the other. Like middle ground has to be avoided at all cost.

But isn't some of that because we drafted well? The last time we really threw money at a top FA it was Brandon Carr and that was because we had a huge hole at CB. In the last 3 or 4 years you can make the argument we were better off with the inhouse options than throwing top dollar at FA.

Its not true across the board obviously, I thought Earl Thomas was a lock to sign here and upgrade from Heath. But you can at least see the logic of making value decisions in FA while you build through the draft.

 

[Aviano90]

But isn't some of that because we drafted well? The last time we really threw money at a top FA it was Brandon Carr and that was because we had a huge hole at CB. In the last 3 or 4 years you can make the argument we were better off with the inhouse options than throwing top dollar at FA.

Its not true across the board obviously, I thought Earl Thomas was a lock to sign here and upgrade from Heath. But you can at least see the logic of making value decisions in FA while you build through the draft.

Who knows how it turns out, but I think eventually you have to try and make a move to propel yourself to the top. I think we might have let an opportunity slip through our fingers while Dak was cheap. I think our cap space is going to be soaked up paying the same players more money and we are going to be faced with the same decision in these coming years, too.

But the team can’t be afraid to be a player in the free agent market because they were burned by Brandon Carr 8 years ago. Personally, I don’t think it was even Carr’s fault. He was fine his first couple years here until 2014 when Kiffen and Marinelli took over our defense.

Another thing is I don’t think we have drafted well on defense. I think we have had key misses that has hurt. Gregory and Taco were a bust. Jaylon and LVE have been injured. Hill was a no show so far. Jones has been good but can’t get a turnover to save his life. We really needed a boost on defense in my opinion. But we went with our guys. That didn’t work. Not sure my way would either, but we will never know.

 

[Sevenup3000]

Romo had an excellent offense in 2014, central to that was the offensive line built through the draft. The defense was average especially as our best defender Sean Lee missed the entire season.

The front offices' drafting and cap management has improved massively over the past 5-6 years - Prescott has been the quarterback to benefit.

There was a ton of dead money back in the day but to their credit, the front office has really improved in that regard.

Further, Romo's contract hit along with Prescott's rookie contract weren't as bad as people make out.

The point is that the offensive line is getting older and it's open to debate whether we will continually hit with our draft picks.

If we let Byron Jones walk then the cornerback position will need addressing for a start.

So what you're saying is that the Cowboys were able to put a talented roster around Romo despite his massive franchise contract. You may be explaining how they did so...but that is all you are doing. So we agree: giving Dak Prescott is massive franchise contract...does NOT prohibit the Dallas Cowboys from putting a talented roster around Dak.

The Cowboys need to simply continue to manage the cap...and draft well. By the way, the Cowboys would need to manage the cap and draft well even without Dak's potential contract. And just because Dak doesn't get a franchise contract doesn't guarantee that Dallas will manage the cap or draft well either. The Browns, Jets, Cardinals, Bucs, Dolphins, and Jaguars are a testament to that as they have all recently had highly drafted rookie QBs on contracts and have almost nothing to show for it.

 

[Swagger]

So what you're saying is that the Cowboys were able to put a talented roster around Romo despite his massive franchise contract. You may be explaining how they did so...but that is all you are doing. So we agree: giving Dak Prescott is massive franchise contract...does NOT prohibit the Dallas Cowboys from putting a talented roster around Dak.

The Cowboys need to simply continue to manage the cap...and draft well. By the way, the Cowboys would need to manage the cap and draft well even without Dak's potential contract. And just because Dak doesn't get a franchise contract doesn't guarantee that Dallas will manage the cap or draft well either. The Browns, Jets, Cardinals, Bucs, Dolphins, and Jaguars are a testament to that as they have all recently had highly drafted rookie QBs on contracts and have almost nothing to show for it.

Maybe I'm missing something here but Romo's contract wasn't as massive as people make out compared with other quarterbacks in the league.

My calculations could be wrong but his 2016 contract accounted for 13% of the salary cap?

These figures could be wrong from the following website: -

https://overthecap.com/position/quarterback/2014/

 

[Swagger]

So what you're saying is that the Cowboys were able to put a talented roster around Romo despite his massive franchise contract. You may be explaining how they did so...but that is all you are doing. So we agree: giving Dak Prescott is massive franchise contract...does NOT prohibit the Dallas Cowboys from putting a talented roster around Dak.

The Cowboys need to simply continue to manage the cap...and draft well. By the way, the Cowboys would need to manage the cap and draft well even without Dak's potential contract. And just because Dak doesn't get a franchise contract doesn't guarantee that Dallas will manage the cap or draft well either. The Browns, Jets, Cardinals, Bucs, Dolphins, and Jaguars are a testament to that as they have all recently had highly drafted rookie QBs on contracts and have almost nothing to show for it.

I have never rated Baker Mayfield.

Josh Rosen has been disappointing so far but he did play behind a truly horrific offensive line at the Cards.

Winston has been feast or famine but again, the Bucs don't have a great O Line although he has some quality weapons to throw the ball to. Generally had a poor running game though.

Dolphins have had a truly awful offensive line.

Jaguars haven't had a great offensive line either.

Sam Darnold has shown promise playing behind a truly awful offensive line and very few weapons.

The common theme above is regardless of how impressive/disappointing the rookie quarterbacks have been, they have not played behind good offensive lines with the exception of Baker Mayfield who has been overrated thus far.

I would be interested to see how the likes of Darnold and Winston would fare behind strong offensive lines.

Your post just reinforces my view that I cannot see Prescott refusing to sign a franchise tag unless he is only motivated by money. He has had extremely favourable conditions for a quarterback compared with those teams mentioned above (except the Browns last season).

He would be in a for a real shock if he played on an offense like the Jets had last season.

 

[TwentyOne]

I think your NFL QB network....needs a software update... this is the YEAR 2020!

And with that you are trying to say.. what ?