J-man
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 2,539
- Reaction score
- 2,199
So I was thinking about Dak's potential deal and the perimeters. I think by now we all know that he's going to get paid between 35-40 million/yr and it's just a matter of the terms and guaranteed $.
He reportedly wouldn't sign last year to due the length of contract, only wanting 4 yrs not 5.
I realize that the cap hit makes it difficult to pay him that much $ without spreading the deal out as long as possible. But regardless of how the deal is ultimately structured the team knows they are about to be in QB cap hell for the next several years and there isn't very much they can do about it until they can draft a QB that can be the starter on a rookie deal.
So, knowing this and with all the long term deals blowing up in teams faces lately, doesn't it make sense to give him the shorter contract he desires?
What if they offered him a 2 year deal worth $75m ($37.5m/) or a 3 year deal worth $105m ($35m/?
All fully guaranteed $, but based on games played.
Meaning it's all base salary and is divided up by 17 games checks annually, which he collects, as long as he plays. 2yr deal is $2.205 and change /gm 3yr deal is $2.058 and change /gm
If he doesn't play a game for any reason, he forfeits the check. If he gets injured, sick, if he gets covid or if they bench him for poor play he isn't guaranteed the $. Obviously they could work out an injury clause just in case like all players have in their deals. And they can decide to pay him if he misses a game for whatever reason, if they choose to do so in good faith.
This way the team is protected from the long term nightmare if he fails, but he's guaranteed cash if he does his job. And be in a position to possibly do it again before he gets to the point of regression.
I know this is a pipe dream as the PA would never allow it and the Cowboys might not be able to make the $ work. But it's fun to speculate and think outside the box on these things.
He reportedly wouldn't sign last year to due the length of contract, only wanting 4 yrs not 5.
I realize that the cap hit makes it difficult to pay him that much $ without spreading the deal out as long as possible. But regardless of how the deal is ultimately structured the team knows they are about to be in QB cap hell for the next several years and there isn't very much they can do about it until they can draft a QB that can be the starter on a rookie deal.
So, knowing this and with all the long term deals blowing up in teams faces lately, doesn't it make sense to give him the shorter contract he desires?
What if they offered him a 2 year deal worth $75m ($37.5m/) or a 3 year deal worth $105m ($35m/?
All fully guaranteed $, but based on games played.
Meaning it's all base salary and is divided up by 17 games checks annually, which he collects, as long as he plays. 2yr deal is $2.205 and change /gm 3yr deal is $2.058 and change /gm
If he doesn't play a game for any reason, he forfeits the check. If he gets injured, sick, if he gets covid or if they bench him for poor play he isn't guaranteed the $. Obviously they could work out an injury clause just in case like all players have in their deals. And they can decide to pay him if he misses a game for whatever reason, if they choose to do so in good faith.
This way the team is protected from the long term nightmare if he fails, but he's guaranteed cash if he does his job. And be in a position to possibly do it again before he gets to the point of regression.
I know this is a pipe dream as the PA would never allow it and the Cowboys might not be able to make the $ work. But it's fun to speculate and think outside the box on these things.
