Dak Prescott's rank on NFL's worst contracts list makes no sense at all

[Swagger]

It’s the worst contract in NFL history besides Deshaun Watson’s.

Yep. $231 million guaranteed. 4 year contract. No trade clause. The quarterback in question has a 2-4 in the post season on some good teams. Unbelievable yet it actually happened.

Some people always try to thrown in the likes of Tua, Lawrence and Herbert and claim hey look at their contracts...but the huge difference is that they were all high first round picks and it's their first major contract. When those quarterbacks have been given a modicum of a good team they have all played well. To my knowledge they have longer contracts to work with the team. Plus they can all actually move 2 yards without tearing their hamstring off the bone as well.

 

[Streifenkarl]

I'm not ranking this deal against others, that's just click bait and nonsense overall.

But it was a bad deal and you don't do bad just because it could have gotten worse.

- proven non performer in the play offs
- rather severe injury (he did have a good regular season after that but was less mobile)
- age
- was asking for his second big contract
- was asking for a (then) record amount of money, which in itself wasn't justified
- even during his stats raking seasons a no show against contenders
- not Daks fault but the team wasn't about to win a championship and they weren't building a championship bound group, so bad strategy also

All in all they should have gone with a full rebuild. But what they were doing was, once again, going for mediocrity, going for safety. They thought Dak would be always good for a +500 season. He wasn't, even before the injury last year.

As said many times, I don't blame Dak for going for that deal. You only got one career

But I do blame the Jones boys for handing it out. For wasting another half decade of my time. For (seemingly) not thinking in championship windows but rather in "let's just be always part of the upper 50%" boredom.

 

[Swagger]

Anyone got that video of a retired David Carr owning Dak Prescott?

 

[DandyDon52]

Since jerry had set up a lame duck, losing season with his offseason actions, why sign dak at all?
Why not let him play out that year then sign him after the season ?
Why give him the no trade clause again ??

 

[Johannes44]

Dak Prescotts contract is what you get when you operate from a position of fear.

 

[SultanOfSix]

It’s the worst contract because it’s a second high paying one and the highest of all time for someone who’s not only not accomplished anything in the postseason he’s also shown that he can’t handle adversity there and becomes Mr. Choke when it happens.

 

[Hadenough]

What else were the Cowboys supposed to do? Come on.

It's very easy to poke fun at the Dallas Cowboys and quarterback Dak Prescott for having failed to progress in the postseason, but the constant hand-wringing and complaining about his contract doesn't have as much weight behind it as many believe.

The Cowboys are all-in on Prescott, as they agreed to a four-year, $240 million contract with him following his past success. That is the type of contract that is instantly going to make any Cowboys hater green with envy when Prescott doesn't end world hunger or solve one of the Millennium Prize Problems every single week.

https://thelandryhat.com/dak-prescott-rank-nfl-worst-contracts-list-makes-no-sense-at-all

The problem is some view his contract based on his past success. He never should of been given that contract based on his continued failures and his inability to perform in the playoffs at his season level of play. During the season he is a pretty decent QB but during the playoffs his performance makes him look like a bottom of the league QB. If it were up to me Dak would of been let go along with McCarthy after that GB game. And it would of been the right move to date because he played horrible in the beginning of the season and than got hurt. Look at all the money I would saved. You have to follow your eyes not your heart like Jerry does.

 

[CowboysLakerBamaFan]

When the primary argument is "What else were they supposed to do?"....Its typically a losing argument.

Exactly.

And then of course the ole "he was ALMOST an MVP in 2023" (same year he embarrassed everyone once again with a choke for the ages in the playoffs. Again)

Also justifies it by proclaiming him a Top 10 QB.

Who in here wrote that article? Sounds like half the threads in here

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Yep. $231 million guaranteed. 4 year contract. No trade clause. The quarterback in question has a 2-4 in the post season on some good teams. Unbelievable yet it actually happened.

Some people always try to thrown in the likes of Tua, Lawrence and Herbert and claim hey look at their contracts...but the huge difference is that they were all high first round picks and it's their first major contract. When those quarterbacks have been given a modicum of a good team they have all played well. To my knowledge they have longer contracts to work with the team. Plus they can all actually move 2 yards without tearing their hamstring off the bone as well.

You’re giving him too much credit.

He’s 2-5 in the postseason.

The worst record ever for a QB with at least 5 playoff starts.

 

[Johannes44]

Dak Prescott's rank on NFL's worst contracts list makes no sense at all​

Oh it makes total sense when you consider that the contract itself makes no sense. This is his third contract one that was handed to him after failing to live up to the second contract they gave him. So yea I’d say it makes no sense .

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Owners really need to put a stop to this “it’s this QBs turn to get paid so he gets to be the new highest paid player ever” nonsense.

Crappy QBs like Dak are ruining teams chances of competing just by simply being the next QB that gets paid.

It’s insane that owners have been dumb enough to let it get to this point.

 

[Qcard]

It was a terrible deal and the Cowboys will be hamstrung until 2028 because of it. 60 million per is too much for any player; much less a player past his prime that has never had consistent success against top teams.

And that doesn’t even take into account the evaluation of Dak’s talent, which is below par when it comes to throwing the ball, reading defenses and avoiding pressure. He’s always been a player that’s fed off the rest of the offense, not the other way around.

Attention ALL Dak Haters....this is an AI response to @ChronicCowboy Fact Free post....

Here’s a direct and fact-based reply that addresses the inaccuracies in the post:

That take is filled with misinformation and oversimplification. Let's break it down:

"Terrible deal" and "hamstrung until 2028":

The reported structure of Dak Prescott’s deal (if you're referring to the projected extension or a prior contract) likely includes cap maneuverability, just like his 2021 extension did. The Cowboys have restructured his contract multiple times to free up space. Saying they’re “hamstrung until 2028” assumes a static cap and no creative management—both of which are false assumptions in today’s NFL.

"60 million per is too much":

Quarterback contracts are based on market value, not just raw talent. The salary cap increases every year, and with the expected media rights growth, $60M could be a mid-tier QB salary by 2026. Patrick Mahomes, once considered “expensive,” is now underpaid relative to his production.

"Past his prime":

Dak turns 32 in 2025. That’s still prime for modern QBs. He’s coming off one of the most efficient seasons of his career (2023: 4,516 yards, 36 TDs, 9 INTs, 105.9 passer rating), led the NFL in touchdown passes, and finished second in MVP voting.

"Never had consistent success against top teams":

He’s had notable wins over playoff-caliber teams (Eagles, Rams, Patriots, Seahawks, etc.) over multiple seasons. While postseason success has eluded the Cowboys, that’s a team issue—not one that falls solely on Dak.

"Below par throwing the ball, reading defenses, and avoiding pressure":
That’s just false. Dak ranked near the top of the league in EPA/play, completion percentage over expected, and passer rating under pressure in 2023. He’s known for his high football IQ and pre-snap adjustments—he’s not elite at everything, but "below par" is a misrepresentation.

"Fed off the rest of the offense":

Every QB benefits from supporting talent, but Dak has routinely elevated the offense, even with a below-average run game or subpar O-line (see 2020 or stretches of 2022). You don’t finish top 5 in nearly every major passing category by just "riding the wave."

In short: Dak is a top-10 QB being paid like one, in line with market dynamics. You can critique playoff results, but don’t rewrite facts to fit a false narrative.

DAK HATE IS NOT ABOUT FOOTBALL!!

 

[Swagger]

You’re giving him too much credit.

He’s 2-5 in the postseason.

The worst record ever for a QB with at least 5 playoff starts.

Oh wow. Ok. Even worse than I thought!

 

[Swagger]

Owners really need to put a stop to this “it’s this QBs turn to get paid so he gets to be the new highest paid player ever” nonsense.

Crappy QBs like Dak are ruining teams chances of competing just by simply being the next QB that gets paid.

It’s insane that owners have been dumb enough to let it get to this point.

It seems owners have cottoned on.

A year after Prescott's contract Josh Allen signed a 6 year extension at $55 million a year with $250 million guaranteed. Brock Purdy agreed to a 5 year extension at $53 million a year with $181 million guaranteed. I personally don't think Purdy is worth a big contract and it will effectively kneecap the 49ers like Prescott has done to the Cowboys but at least he can say that he has reached and narrowly lost in a Superbowl against the Chiefs and Mahomes.

$60 million a year with $231 million guaranteed over 4 years for Prescott is horrific in comparison and it was signed a season earlier!

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

It seems owners have cottoned on.

A year after Prescott's contract Josh Allen signed a 6 year extension at $55 million a year with $250 million guaranteed. Brock Purdy agreed to a 5 year extension at $53 million a year with $181 milion guaranteed.

$60 million a year with $231 guaranteed over 4 years for Prescott is horrific in comparison.

Dak had to get that money “for the brotherhood” when in reality he might have ruined it for the brotherhood instead.

 

[pitt33]

Although I participate in our Qb debates here every now and then, I realized that the man building the roster is hopeless.

Hard fact.

 

[Creeper]

Someone came up with this article just to get my goat I think.

Of course Dak has to be at the top of the list somewhere in terms of bad contracts. Almost every aspect of his deal is bad for Dallas.

The annual salary is far more than Dak has earned, I don't care how well he played in 2023. He failed when it mattered most. Players who play well in the playoffs deserve top dollars. Players who have to prove they can play well in pressure situations do not.

Then there is the term of the deal. 4 years only. This means Dallas will be faced with negotiating with Dak again, or opting for another QB at some point. It also means spreading out his bonus over 4 years, or into voidable years - a bad idea for a QB who has to prove still that he can compete in the playoffs.

Then there is the no trade clause. This means the Cowboys can't get out of the Dak deal with compensation. When he leaves they get nothing in return.

Watson's contract was just stupid. He is another player who never showed he is great - and he had baggage. But Dak's contract is almost as bad for Dallas.

The question posed is what was Dallas supposed to do? They were supposed to say no to $60 million and 4 years. It's called negotiating. But they put themselves in this worst position possible with his previous contract when they gave in to 4 years and a no trade clause - and a no franchise tag clause. The lack of leverage in negotiations was their fault. The question I would ask is what would Dak have done if the Cowboys said no to $60 million, or to 4 years, or to the no trade clause? What was Dak going to go? No team should ever think that the whole team revolves around one player. Every payer has an expiration date so getting on without a player should never be a major problem if the team prepares. If Dallas has to move on without Dak in 2028 or 2024 what's the difference. They will face the problem at some point no matter what.