Do you want the Cowboys to sign Dak Prescott to another long term deal?

Do you want the Cowboys to sign Dak Prescott to another long term deal?


  • Total voters
    338
  • Poll closed .

5Stars

Here comes the Sun...
Messages
37,601
Reaction score
16,371
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
Dak ONLY HAS LEVERAGE IF THE COWBOYS TRULY WANT HIM. You KEEP REPEATING something YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND.

A wife has leverage with her husband...IF HE WANTS HER. If he doesn't want her...she can threaten to leave, take the kids, the house...etc. So he will lose something...but if he doesn't WANT her...she has a lot less leverage. Dak's only leverage is that he is a division-winning QB every other year or so. Is that what Jerry wants? If not, Dak has NO LEVERAGE AT ALL.
Right. I find it funny that a poster or three say Dak has all the leverage, JJ has none. Well, one is the employer and the other is the employee. How in the hell does an employee have more leverage than an owner? Dak lovers have no logic, just love for a loser.
 

CowboyFrog

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,334
Reaction score
11,286
Dak ONLY HAS LEVERAGE IF THE COWBOYS TRULY WANT HIM. You KEEP REPEATING something YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND.

A wife has leverage with her husband...IF HE WANTS HER. If he doesn't want her...she can threaten to leave, take the kids, the house...etc. So he will lose something...but if he doesn't WANT her...she has a lot less leverage. Dak's only leverage is that he is a division-winning QB every other year or so. Is that what Jerry wants? If not, Dak has NO LEVERAGE AT ALL.
they offered him 55 mill, how does that say they dont want him? Leverage and budget are 2 diferent things...one has options the other has a budget..sure the Cowboys can say "Thats our max" thats not leverage thats a budget...Which one of the 2 sides has the option that WILL drive the other to the negotiating table? thats leverage and the Cowboys dont have any at all...they have a budget which is the opposite of leverage...What exactly can the Cowboys do to make Dak come to the table? Dak can walk and leave the Cowboys with Rush and Lance...wether you like it or not thats leverage no matter wether you like Dak as a QB or dont..the Cowboys options suck...
 

J-man

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,639
Reaction score
2,251
I said yes, but I'm not in for a long term deal, but yes to an extension. He likes to get as many dips as possible so I'd offer 2 years @ $55M/yr, get it done.
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
83,499
Reaction score
76,338
Fields sucks. Who'd I rather have? Doesn't matter, flip a coin. Unless ur referring specifically to the draft pick given up, then I agree w/ you.
I’d rather have neither but yeah I would’ve rather had suck for a 6th rounder than suck for a 4th rounder.
 

Blitzen

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,309
Reaction score
2,509
Dak has all the leverage and the Cowboys have none. There isn’t going to be any standoff. Either the Cowboys will pay Dak or someone else will. If the team isn’t able to agree to terms with him by March 13, he’s a free agent and will very likely sign with another team

If Dak held all the leverage in the negotiation with the Cowboys, then a deal would have already been struck. The current negotiation between Dak and the Cowboys is a standoff (no matter what happens with negotiations between Dak and another team). No deal means neither side had a significant amount of leverage if both parties wanted a deal. Only accepted deals can show leveraged proportions by looking at terms after the fact.
 

CowboyFrog

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,334
Reaction score
11,286
If Dak held all the leverage in the negotiation with the Cowboys, then a deal would have already been struck. The current negotiation between Dak and the Cowboys is a standoff (no matter what happens with negotiations between Dak and another team). No deal means neither side had a significant amount of leverage if both parties wanted a deal. Only accepted deals can show leveraged proportions by looking at terms after the fact.
This can be true in this negotiation, and we wont know until FA hits to see what happens...probably the best way to put it is I dont see how the Cowboys could have any leverage in this, i can see how Dak has leverage with FA looming....If they had a QB in house this would be diferent in my eyes.
 

KJJ

You Have an Axe to Grind
Messages
61,530
Reaction score
38,882
If Dak held all the leverage in the negotiation with the Cowboys, then a deal would have already been struck. The current negotiation between Dak and the Cowboys is a standoff (no matter what happens with negotiations between Dak and another team). No deal means neither side had a significant amount of leverage if both parties wanted a deal. Only accepted deals can show leveraged proportions by looking at terms after the fact.
The fact that he has all the leverage is the reason a deal hasn’t been struck. He can afford to stand is ground. He’s already making $40 million per season and will be getting a lot more than that after this season. You really don’t understand the situation. Dak is in a position where he’s going to get paid HUGE no matter what, unless he suffers a serious career threatening injury. The Cowboys only have his rights for this season. He’ll be as free as a bird come March 13, 2025. He’ll end up resetting the QB market with another team and the Cowboys will be stuck looking for another starting QB. It would be like losing your beautiful girlfriend to another man and having to settle for an ugly one. Lol Jerry will be in the same sinking boat he was in after he released Troy Aikman. He had nothing at QB and it led to 5 very lean years. Go look at the carousel of QBs we went through during those years. Dak has all the chips on his side. You’re acting like we have him locked up and he’s going to have to concede. Lol You might want to rethink your position that he has no leverage.
 

Blitzen

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,309
Reaction score
2,509
The fact that he has all the leverage is the reason a deal hasn’t been struck. He can afford to stand is ground. He’s already making $40 million per season and will be getting a lot more than that after this season. You really don’t understand the situation. Dak is in a position where he’s going to get paid HUGE no matter what, unless he suffers a serious career threatening injury. The Cowboys only have his rights for this season. He’ll be as free as a bird come March 13, 2025. He’ll end up resetting the QB market with another team and the Cowboys will be stuck looking for another starting QB. It would be like losing your beautiful girlfriend to another man and having to settle for an ugly one. Lol Jerry will be in the same sinking boat he was in after he released Troy Aikman. He had nothing at QB and it led to 5 very lean years. Go look at the carousel of QBs we went through during those years. Dak has all the chips on his side. You’re acting like we have him locked up and he’s going to have to concede. Lol You might want to rethink your position that he has no leverage.

Sorry, you do not understand the concept of leverage. I’m speaking about leverage between the Cowboys’ FO and Dak/agent.

Let’s say that the deal Dak would sign is a contract that had $250M guaranteed at signing (high AAV-even $70M). Lots of years (voidable too) and all the clauses he wants. The team COULD do that deal and push lots of money down the road-teams eventually have to deal with dead money on those contracts once the player finally leaves the team. If the Cowboys’ FO will not agree to a deal like that-then Dak does not hold enough leverage with the Cowboys to finalize a deal (another way of saying he has no significant leverage with the Cowboys).

If the team goes into next season with poor QB replacements, then the team understood that now as a possibility. The QB carousel was a small reason for the early 2000’s 5-11 seasons. See draft management, younger and more bitter JJ, Joey Galloway trade, Dave Campo, much worse roster as the primary reasons.
 

OGSixshooter

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,280
Reaction score
2,709
Ok so it’s personal for you. I don’t play on emotion. I don’t know what to tell you. Dak has one year left on his deal all I can do is advise you to suck it up for another year or move on. What do you want me to say?
I'm starting to see you that you type a bunch of words hoping something sticks.

"I don't care", I don't care" = "It's personal for you"

"I don't play on emotion" - Runs away from any analytical discussion.

You DO realize that Dak does not have a new contract? LOL...that's called PROJECTION. Your projecting your anxieties on me, your emotion on me...your personal attachment on me.

You might think you're clever...or something...but anyone whose brain is not compromised can see your stances for what they are: Dak-fan...not Cowboys fan.
 

OGSixshooter

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,280
Reaction score
2,709
You’re the one that doesn’t understand. You’re making absolutely no sense. :rolleyes: Dak has leverage whether the Cowboys want him or not because other teams will want him and will be more than willing to make him the highest paid QB in NFL history. The Cowboys know there’s other teams that will be able to pay him more than they will, so the only way Dak remains a Cowboy past this season is if he wants to be here and is willing to take less than what he could get in free agency. The only gamble he’s taking is if he suffers a serious injury or has a miserable season. There’s some who think Dak could get as much as $70 million in free agency. The Cowboys couldn’t come close to paying him that. We’ve seen the crazy free agent contracts that have been signed. They’ll pale in comparison to what a QB who’s at the top of their game could earn on the open market. To say Dak has no leverage in bold print is absolutely laughable. :laugh:
What you say only makes sense if you CARE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS TO DAK IF HE IS NO LONGER A COWBOY.

I don't. :)

You are personally vested on Dak's situation in totality...I am NOT. Dak's leverage with some other team doesn't matter. If you are a KC fan, Dak has no leverage with your org. If you are a Bills fan, same. If you are a Bears fan, same. GET IT YET? Probably not...you're stuck on Dak winning not the Cowboys.

You've LOST THE PLOT...It's not about Dak, it's about THE TEAM. If the COWBOYS don't want him, he's got no leverage. ARE YOU GETTING THIS YET?

Halle Berry had leverage with a ton of men...not David Justice. not Wesley Snipes. not Eric Benet. They either got better or had enough experience to walk away. GET IT YET?
 

5Stars

Here comes the Sun...
Messages
37,601
Reaction score
16,371
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
I'm starting to see you that you type a bunch of words hoping something sticks.

"I don't care", I don't care" = "It's personal for you"

"I don't play on emotion" - Runs away from any analytical discussion.

You DO realize that Dak does not have a new contract? LOL...that's called PROJECTION. Your projecting your anxieties on me, your emotion on me...your personal attachment on me.

You might think you're clever...or something...but anyone whose brain is not compromised can see your stances for what they are: Dak-fan...not Cowboys fan.
It's rabbit hole talk is all.
 

5Stars

Here comes the Sun...
Messages
37,601
Reaction score
16,371
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
What you say only makes sense if you CARE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS TO DAK IF HE IS NO LONGER A COWBOY.

I don't. :)

You are personally vested on Dak's situation in totality...I am NOT. Dak's leverage with some other team doesn't matter. If you are a KC fan, Dak has no leverage with your org. If you are a Bills fan, same. If you are a Bears fan, same. GET IT YET? Probably not...you're stuck on Dak winning not the Cowboys.

You've LOST THE PLOT...It's not about Dak, it's about THE TEAM. If the COWBOYS don't want him, he's got no leverage. ARE YOU GETTING THIS YET?

Halle Berry had leverage with a ton of men...not David Justice. not Wesley Snipes. not Eric Benet. They either got better or had enough experience to walk away. GET IT YET?
You have already lost this argument with him, so good luck from now until, well, forever! lol
 

TheMarathonContinues

Well-Known Member
Messages
83,499
Reaction score
76,338
I'm starting to see you that you type a bunch of words hoping something sticks.

"I don't care", I don't care" = "It's personal for you"

"I don't play on emotion" - Runs away from any analytical discussion.

You DO realize that Dak does not have a new contract? LOL...that's called PROJECTION. Your projecting your anxieties on me, your emotion on me...your personal attachment on me.

You might think you're clever...or something...but anyone whose brain is not compromised can see your stances for what they are: Dak-fan...not Cowboys fan.
I’ve never said I wasn’t a Dak fan lol. It’s well documented. It’s not something I hide. What I’m asking you is what type of advice would you like me to give you? You’re emotional. He’s here at least one more year barring a benching. I just don’t know what you want?
 

KJJ

You Have an Axe to Grind
Messages
61,530
Reaction score
38,882
Sorry, you do not understand the concept of leverage. I’m speaking about leverage between the Cowboys’ FO and Dak/agent.
If I don’t understand the concept of leverage then how come everyone who gets paid to talk football is saying Dak has the most leverage of any player in NFL history? The leverage between the Cowboys FO and Dak and his agent is what we’re talking about. The Cowboys are trying to work out a deal with them and according to what’s been reported offers have been made and he’s not accepting them. Stephen said three weeks ago they want to extend Dak but it’s going to be up to him. No wasting anymore time with this.

https://www.on3.com/pro/news/dak-pr...to-become-nfls-highest-ever-paid-quarterback/

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/57...prescott-contract-negotiation-dallas-cowboys/

https://atozsports.com/nfl/dallas-c...ns-how-powerful-dak-prescott-position-is-nfl/

https://www.si.com/nfl/cowboys/news...ate-dallas-cowboys-quarterback-value-leverage
 

OGSixshooter

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,280
Reaction score
2,709
they offered him 55 mill, how does that say they dont want him? Leverage and budget are 2 diferent things...one has options the other has a budget..sure the Cowboys can say "Thats our max" thats not leverage thats a budget...Which one of the 2 sides has the option that WILL drive the other to the negotiating table? thats leverage and the Cowboys dont have any at all...they have a budget which is the opposite of leverage...What exactly can the Cowboys do to make Dak come to the table? Dak can walk and leave the Cowboys with Rush and Lance...wether you like it or not thats leverage no matter wether you like Dak as a QB or dont..the Cowboys options suck...
Leverage and budget are different but absolutely linked. You need leverage in a budget situation where you need to make choices.

We don't know what the Cowboys offered, we know they are paying him $55 million, but contracts and leverage are generally about the future and another commodity: TIME.

The Cowboys (and Jerry) don't want to waste MORE TIME AND MONEY on a loser. They will risk SOME...but not if he imagines himself the same as Patrick Mahomes. If he does, then Dak loses leverage.
I think what you guys don't get is that the Cowboys DON'T HAVE TO WANT DAK. SEE THE VIKINGS. Kurt Cousins had SOME LEVERAGE, but not all. SEE THE RAVENS. Lamar Jackson had some leverage...BUT NOT ALL....and he was AN ACTUAL MVP, not a runner up. The idea that those 2 guys had less leverage than Dak because of no-trade/franchise tag options MISSES THE POINT: If a team is willing to let you walk, then none of the player's BLUFFS MATTER TO THAT TEAM. The Ravens were perfectly willing to let Lamar walk...all a team had to was match. Lamar CAVED TO THEM and THE RAVENS BUDGET...not the other way around
 

OGSixshooter

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,280
Reaction score
2,709
If I don’t understand the concept of leverage then how come everyone who gets paid to talk football is saying Dak has the most leverage of any player in NFL history? The leverage between the Cowboys FO and Dak and his agent is what we’re talking about. The Cowboys are trying to work out a deal with them and according to what’s been reported offers have been made and he’s not accepting them. Stephen said three weeks ago they want to extend Dak but it’s going to be up to him. No wasting anymore time with this.

https://www.on3.com/pro/news/dak-pr...to-become-nfls-highest-ever-paid-quarterback/

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/57...prescott-contract-negotiation-dallas-cowboys/

https://atozsports.com/nfl/dallas-c...ns-how-powerful-dak-prescott-position-is-nfl/

https://www.si.com/nfl/cowboys/news...ate-dallas-cowboys-quarterback-value-leverage
"EVERYONE" writes articles, they don't make money. Ask JERRY JONES WHO HAS THE LEVERAGE. Ask Bob Kraft who had the leverage with Belichick. Money talks...and the Star and the Cowboys will be here if Dak dies in strip club tomorrow. You are simply too far gone and in love with Dak to understand this.
 

KJJ

You Have an Axe to Grind
Messages
61,530
Reaction score
38,882
"EVERYONE" writes articles, they don't make money. Ask JERRY JONES WHO HAS THE LEVERAGE. Ask Bob Kraft who had the leverage with Belichick. Money talks...and the Star and the Cowboys will be here if Dak dies in strip club tomorrow. You are simply too far gone and in love with Dak to understand this.
What leverage did Bill Belichick have? His team was losing and he’s in his early 70s. He’s currently sitting on his couch because no one wanted him.
 

CowboyFrog

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,334
Reaction score
11,286
Leverage and budget are different but absolutely linked. You need leverage in a budget situation where you need to make choices.

We don't know what the Cowboys offered, we know they are paying him $55 million, but contracts and leverage are generally about the future and another commodity: TIME.

The Cowboys (and Jerry) don't want to waste MORE TIME AND MONEY on a loser. They will risk SOME...but not if he imagines himself the same as Patrick Mahomes. If he does, then Dak loses leverage.
I think what you guys don't get is that the Cowboys DON'T HAVE TO WANT DAK. SEE THE VIKINGS. Kurt Cousins had SOME LEVERAGE, but not all. SEE THE RAVENS. Lamar Jackson had some leverage...BUT NOT ALL....and he was AN ACTUAL MVP, not a runner up. The idea that those 2 guys had less leverage than Dak because of no-trade/franchise tag options MISSES THE POINT: If a team is willing to let you walk, then none of the player's BLUFFS MATTER TO THAT TEAM. The Ravens were perfectly willing to let Lamar walk...all a team had to was match. Lamar CAVED TO THEM and THE RAVENS BUDGET...not the other way around
Ok so your theory is the Cowboys are lying and they dont want Dak anymore, They lied about offering him a contract several weeks ago and have a valid option at QB right now that they are hiding...BTW the last one would be leverage as the others are just a choice...Leverage is when you have something that will force the other side to the negotiating table..what exactly does the FO have that would force Dak to the table? Dak has options coming soon that will up the price and has Rush and Lance as the Cowboys QB if he leaves..those things CAN force this FO to the table...I get it you dont like Dak, this has nothing to do with how leverage in negotiations work, seperate the 2 by simply saying..I hope Dak leaves and no one could argue with you.
 
Top