Is Dak the only super greedy QB in Cowboys history?

[Whyjerry]

Ultimately it’s Jerry’s fault. No one in the league would have given Dak that deal. There was zero reason to max him out. Also QB salaries have gotten out of hand. They need a couple more Watson like deals to blow up to learn their lessons. It shouldn’t be a pull to one number it should be merit based.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Wrong. Romo had more guarantees. Flacco's total contract was higher than Romos.

Was this before or after Flacco won a SB?

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Point is Romo didn't have the highest contract in the NFL.

He had the second highest to the best quarterback of all time. Next year Dak won't be highest paid then what?

 

[America's Cowboy]

got no answer for that do you?

I do but the pro-Romo/anti-Dak mods will punish me for rightfully responding in kind to you Dak detractors. Sadly, that's how things roll around here. I would rather plead the 5th.

 

[DallasEast]

Ultimately it’s Jerry’s fault.

Yep. No player pays themselves.

It shouldn’t be a pull to one number it should be merit based.

While technically contracts can be partially considered merit based due to incentives, all professional team athletic sports contracts are not merit based. Practically, all non-draft contracts are economic-based--with compensation driven by how much value the buyer (owner) assesses the seller (player).

One good way of looking at it is by reviewing non-drafted, free agent contracts. Undrafted players have shown zero NFL-level evidence to justify merit-based compensation. Even so, the amount of money thrown at them varies from player to player--sometimes by a large degree.

 

[jblaze2004]

BOOM!!!

It's funny people forgot Romo was paid and Romo also had great teams. He didn't take those teams any further than Dak took his. So someone saying Romo is 10x better than Dak is just wild. I can see if they said the same as Romo but if you want to go off of stats and wins: Dak > Romo.

 

[DallasEast]

I do but the pro-Romo/anti-Dak mods will punish me for rightfully responding in kind to you Dak detractors. Sadly, that's how things roll around here. I would rather plead the 5th.

None of the staff will punish you. Comments are reviewed according to site rules and sticky notifications.

In other words, your comments, like every member's comments, will decide any possible moderator action. Ultimately, individuals are responsible for their own commentary--not the staff.

 

[5Stars]

I do but the pro-Romo/anti-Dak mods will punish me for rightfully responding in kind to you Dak detractors. Sadly, that's how things roll around here. I would rather plead the 5th.

Oh, so now you are dogging the mods of this site?

#1 - You will not publicly question the actions of the staff or how this site is managed.

Your love of Dak is now getting low down desperation to now call out not only other fans but now the mods.

Classy....

 

[Steve007]

He had the second highest to the best quarterback of all time. Next year Dak won't be highest paid then what?

LOL....He will still be overpaid.

 

[Whyjerry]

Yep. No player pays themselves.


While technically contracts can be partially considered merit based due to incentives, all professional team athletic sports contracts are not merit based. Practically, all non-draft contracts are economic-based--with compensation driven by how much value the buyer (owner) assesses the seller (player).

One good way of looking at it is by reviewing non-drafted, free agent contracts. Undrafted players have shown zero NFL-level evidence to justify merit-based compensation. Even so, the amount of money thrown at them varies from player to player--sometimes by a large degree.

What I meant is QB contracts are less independent. The next great one looks at the last big deal and says I want more than that and on and on. Look at Murray’s contract. There is no way that guy should be getting paid that. Certainly not based on his production. Daniel Jones $40MM is also absurd. I think the Watson deal has people starting to think.

 

[Diehardblues]

Wrong. Romo had more guarantees. Flacco's total contract was higher than Romos.

Yes but it was presented as such at the time. And it was very short lived as Rodgers and someone else surpassed it before that offseason.

 

[Diehardblues]

Who cares? I don't care if Romo or Dak won it or got second place.

Unfortunately neither appear to have been enough. Clock is still ticking on Prescott.

But these Market Price contracts are over spun. It’s all about when you get paid and doesn’t usually represent a pecking order.

 

[Jarv]

Reading is fundamental and you said Josh Allen was runner up and he wasn't lol. You can't create your own MVP process lol.

Hopefully third time is a charm, I'm talking about 1st place votes. Said it from the very start, maybe if you read a little slower it might help???

 

[speedkilz88]

When he signed his $108 million extension it made him the 5th highest paid QB in 2013.

Had Dak accepted the 5th highest last year we would have saved $7 million per season ($53 million, 11.7% cheaper). That 7 million per, if given to someone else, would be the 10th highest paid player on this year's team.

Not blaming Dak, but he isn't worth either of those 2 numbers IMHO. Especially since, as shown above, it's not just costing the team an overpaid player (Dak) but also another above average starter somewhere else on the team.

If Tony was in Dak's situation with his stats he would have been asking for the same as Dak. Very rare for a guy to not ask for everything they are due.

 

[DallasEast]

What I meant is QB contracts are less independent. The next great one looks at the last big deal and says I want more than that and on and on. Look at Murray’s contract. There is no way that guy should be getting paid that. Certainly not based on his production. Daniel Jones $40MM is also absurd. I think the Watson deal has people starting to think.

I agree with all that but you are essentially validating the premise of economic supply and demand. Quarterback is the top position. It will demand the most compensation (by far).

For that reason, the next quarterback contract will always be less impacted by the previous 'biggest contract in NFL history'. It always only takes one owner. If that single checkwriter feels strongly enough that a particular quarterback is worth x-amount, they will pay it. Factor in all the stats. Throw position measurables into the mix. All of it is irrelevant to the single person on earth paying the contract.

 

[America's Cowboy]

It's funny people forgot Romo was paid and Romo also had great teams. He didn't take those teams any further than Dak took his. So someone saying Romo is 10x better than Dak is just wild. I can see if they said the same as Romo but if you want to go off of stats and wins: Dak > Romo.

Exactly.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

LOL....He will still be overpaid.

Yeah he will be oh well ain't my money lol.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

It's funny people forgot Romo was paid and Romo also had great teams. He didn't take those teams any further than Dak took his. So someone saying Romo is 10x better than Dak is just wild. I can see if they said the same as Romo but if you want to go off of stats and wins: Dak > Romo.

They get amnesia about 2007 team with 13 Pro Bowlers lol and losing to the sorry *** Giants. And they think its justified because they went on to win the SB.....

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Hopefully third time is a charm, I'm talking about 1st place votes. Said it from the very start, maybe if you read a little slower it might help???

And hopefully the millionth time is a charm...Dak was runner up in MVP. Nobody said he was "runner up for 1st place votes".....This is the dumbest argument i've ever seen on this site by far. All to discredit Dak's season. Despite struggling the first 4 weeks of the season he still had a MVP season and you guys are talking about 1st and 2nd place votes....just pure lunacy.

 

[Diehardblues]

It's funny people forgot Romo was paid and Romo also had great teams. He didn't take those teams any further than Dak took his. So someone saying Romo is 10x better than Dak is just wild. I can see if they said the same as Romo but if you want to go off of stats and wins: Dak > Romo.

I think the argument for Romo is he didn’t have as good of defenses nor running game most years. He was believed to have elevated those around him which is often a good measurement.

That said Dak has put up better numbers. And most years had a better running game and defenses.

We can dissect further but it’s an endless subjective dead end .

Both were over achievers from where they came becoming good enough franchise QB’s to build around. Ultimately both have come up short. And both were probably over hyped and over ridiculed.