DLaw looking for 6 years, $140 mil with $85 garuanteed

[Future]

Yeah, they do. The beauty of a 34 is not knowing where the rush is coming from. Now, I agree that you have some LBs who are better pass rushers then others but you don't lock yourself in in a 34. Why even play the 34 if you are going to do this. It defeats the purpose of the scheme. The entire reason the 34 was created was to provide this flexibility. Mack is playing in coverage. He had 4 Passes Defended last year and 1 INT.

Yea but this assumes you're in a base defense in a passing situation. That's almost never the case in the NFL. If the Bears are in a "base" defense 30% of the time, assuming 75 plays total, that's 22 plays. Of those, how many are passing plays? Of those, how many are Mack dropping into coverage? We're talking about maybe 3-4 plays a game here where he's in coverage out of a base defense. Coverage responsibilities for a 3-4 OLB is just not an important thing in today's NFL.

I'm not saying Mack never does, but in a comparison to Lawrence, Von Miller, Dee Ford, Frank Clark, whoever...it's irrelevant. I mean, just go look at his highlights from last year - the whole reel is from nickel packages where he has his hand in the dirt at LE.

Passes defended can just be at the LOS. Lawrence had 1 and 1.

 

[rags747]

I worked in a very large trading room for a corporate, Great lockeroom atmosphere btw where pretty much anything goes. Anyway, we had a Director of all trading in our HQ bldg here in NY, he was from Brasíl. A total madman when we would have our weekly Monday Am meetings in the trading room prior to the mkts opening. He was a Madman but if he liked you you would be ok, fortunately for some reason he liked me and I really loved the guy as well as there was no bs about hurt feelings etc, just very blunt with the way things are.

My point is this, his favorite saying in these weekly meetings was “If you have a problem with something or you don’t like the way things are, Too Bad. I have a list of 50 people who want your jobs today”! The man was very right and he did get rid of all those who he did not like.

 

[Sydla]

Yeah, they do. The beauty of a 34 is not knowing where the rush is coming from. Now, I agree that you have some LBs who are better pass rushers then others but you don't lock yourself in in a 34. Why even play the 34 if you are going to do this. It defeats the purpose of the scheme. The entire reason the 34 was created was to provide this flexibility. Mack is playing in coverage. He had 4 Passes Defended last year and 1 INT.

I think some take this discussion as some sort of slight against Lawrence, when in fact it's not.

Lawrence is a great player. No question about that. But he's not as good as Mack. There's no shame in admitting that.

 

[CouchCoach]

The problem with that is we can pull the tag before then and then who's gonna sign him needing surgery?

Someone will but not what he wants. They're playing the game with the Cowboys to see if they will blink as they did with Bryant but that was different, #1WR's are valued more than good DE's and that's what he is, he isn't great or he would be there at the end of the season. Lawrence is a foreplay D player and never gets us off.

 

[Doomsday101]

That's true, but it means you could have gotten him for much cheaper. That's why teams extend players before they hit the open market. Sometimes its because you can get him for cheaper becuase he hasn't proven himself more.

As for replacements....I don't see it. Quin is a nice addition next to Lawrence but to replace him, he's nowhere near as good. Also has significant injuries. And there's certainly no one on the roster that I see that has the ability to duplicate Lawrence's production. Unfortunately for Dallas, Lawrence has no incentive for signing a team friendly or "fair" deal. He's going to get a premium, whether its from Dallas or some other team.

I agree had they ran the risk and signed last year it would have been cheaper but there is also a down side to lock in on a player who had 1 good season. I also agree Quinn has not performed at the same level but had performed good. As for what he may get from someone else we will see. I still think in the end the 2 sides will strike a deal

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I agree, it is hindsight 20/20. But in the interest of fairness I wanted to point out the hypocrisy in teams regarding the franchise tag. They use it agressively to their advantage but when it blows up in their face (like with Lawrence) they now crying bloody murder at a player asking for the moon.

But your're right, this is the bed Dallas needs to live in. Pay the premium or trade him. But to call out Lawrence and his agent for being greedy and unreasonable is unfair.

They are greedy and unreasonable but so what, anybody who was paying attention knew this before the negotiations started. If you know anything about the agent he hired, you already know how he does business. This was coming a long time now. The minute he hired Canter, I pretty much knew that this is where this was headed. That's how Canter does business.

 

[TheViper7]

Welp! If he does get this kind of money, don't act all surprised or all pissed off D-Law when the offense can't hold up their side of the bargain because we couldn't sign Dak or Zeke or Amari! But as long as you got yours you big meanie!!!!

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yea but this assumes you're in a base defense in a passing situation. That's almost never the case in the NFL. If the Bears are in a "base" defense 30% of the time, assuming 75 plays total, that's 22 plays. Of those, how many are passing plays? Of those, how many are Mack dropping into coverage? We're talking about maybe 3-4 plays a game here where he's in coverage out of a base defense. Coverage responsibilities for a 3-4 OLB is just not an important thing in today's NFL.

I'm not saying Mack never does, but in a comparison to Lawrence, Von Miller, Dee Ford, Frank Clark, whoever...it's irrelevant. I mean, just go look at his highlights from last year - the whole reel is from nickel packages where he has his hand in the dirt at LE.

Passes defended can just be at the LOS. Lawrence had 1 and 1.

OK, but you are only focusing on Pass Rush situations. There is more to Mack's game then that. Now, I agree that this is why Mack got paid but, Mack can do more then just pass rush and there is a difference between 34 OLB and 43 DE. 34 OLBs do have to cover. A good OC can scheme a 34 OLB and force them into coverage. You can't do that with a DE.

 

[Roadtrip635]

This is where pride gets in the way of common sense. He is going to hold out for 3 million a year and then take a deal with someone in a taxable income state and end up with less - but his agent, by the way, is going to get more - Tank will just shoot himself in the foot!

3 million more - Federal taxes off the top take 1 Million - another 1.4 million in State taxes if he does not end up in Florida or Texas - another 300K to his agent - just assume 10% (that may be wrong)

So he gets 300 K a year out of that and the pride of being the highest paid DE

IDIOT and poor advice!

What the Cowboys offered would have already made him the highest paid DE, he turned that down.

 

[Air Force One]

If I'm Dallas, I'd tell his agent sign the tag or don't, it's up to him. We're done now. Stand up and walk out. He'll probably sign the tag and have the surgery with the intent of playing 50% effort. Then trade him mid-season next year.

Worst case he sits out and that will tell us all we need to know about him and we can part ways and protect our future. I'm scared we're going to regret signing this guy long term.

 

[Angus12]

MAYOCK and Gruden love Tank.

Maybe so. But I still don't see how that means they would give up a first and second for him. You make it sound like the only thing holding that up is our not pulling the trigger. And if that was the case, whoever 86'd that offer should be tarred and feathered.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Welp! If he does get this kind of money, don't act all surprised or all pissed off D-Law when the offense can't hold up their side of the bargain because we couldn't sign Dak or Zeke or Amari! But as long as you got yours d**khead!

Yep, I agree. This is what this comes down to. If you do this, then you are either forced to do the same for your other big time players or you have to then explain to them why they are not worth the same type of consideration that you gave to DLaw. I mean, that's the definition of a no win scenario.

BTW, I would seriously consider changing the last word in your post. That's going to get your post deleted and land you an infraction. I mean, I get it and that's exactly how I feel but no reason to do harm on yourself. Viper.

 

[Angus12]

The Raiders would not do that, they didn't want to give Mack, Mack Money, then they have to give up draft picks too? They'll take their chances in the draft, in a DL deep draft at that.

Exactly.

 

[Verdict]

Everyone's gotta start a thread

There is nothing wrong with that. Lighten up on the OP.

 

[Nightman]

This is where pride gets in the way of common sense. He is going to hold out for 3 million a year and then take a deal with someone in a taxable income state and end up with less - but his agent, by the way, is going to get more - Tank will just shoot himself in the foot!

3 million more - Federal taxes off the top take 1 Million - another 1.4 million in State taxes if he does not end up in Florida or Texas - another 300K to his agent - just assume 10% (that may be wrong)

So he gets 300 K a year out of that and the pride of being the highest paid DE

IDIOT and poor advice!

It is not as big a savings as advertised

Players still have to pay State and Local taxes in the cities they play on the road

Their tax returns must be a bear

 

[Verdict]

I firmly believe that this is the Cowboys "leaking" these numbers out. Public negotiating tactics.

That's a last gasp before trying to trade him. That's my take.

 

[john]

Raiders would give us a 1 and a 2 in this years draft..I promise you that...and maybe even a future conditional 3rd.

This scenario has actually come up and Broaddus and co. were talking about this on their show the other nite and the feeling is they would not get a Raiders 1st rd pick. So the question is do you take a 2nd and move on from Lawrence?

 

[Nightman]

That's a last gasp before trying to trade him. That's my take.

Let him sit until Week 10 and save 12m and get him back for the Playoffs

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think some take this discussion as some sort of slight against Lawrence, when in fact it's not.

Lawrence is a great player. No question about that. But he's not as good as Mack. There's no shame in admitting that.

You know, it's not even what you or I may think of either player. You are right, it's what NFL talent personnel think and it's pretty clear that teams believe Mack is regarded higher. I mean, it is what it is. Here is the thing about it thou, even though I believe Mack is the more talented player, I still wouldn't pay him what the Bears did because it's not about how talented either of them are. It's about the resources available to this team, over the next few years, that will allow them to keep their team core intact. I mean, I just don't understand how people don't get this?

 

[dckid]

So I guess this is going to go a couple of ways.
Either we somehow come to an agreement. Bite the bullet and overpay, as we wanted him to prove it last year. Oversight by Front office but it happens. They probably didn't expect Mack to get traded and sign a huge deal.
We trade him and get good value, maybe the Raiders will be willing to deal as Gruden stated pass rushers are hard to get.
Lawrence situation gets ugly, he holds out signs for franchise tag gets surgery misses half the season. And we get very little value for his services.