Twitter: KC: Dak must reach playoffs consistently if he's paid premium QB money

[Diehardblues]

There are many options but the more important question is, If we sign Dak to that contract, will we be able to contend now?

It doesn’t look like we can contend without him? Unless there’s something in the horizon we haven’t seen.

And I think that’s how our ownership , etc will view it. We know what we have with Dak. He’s taken us to the brink of a championship game a couple times. For most teams that’s enough to invest in.

 

[kskboys]

Some scenario like this is coming.
Tagged QBs never get resigned by the team that tags them. Ever.
Plus DAL simply doesn’t have any money, a terrible roster save a few positions and little options.

I'm actually trying to think of one, and I got nothing. Good post.

 

[Diehardblues]

Tannehill says howdy.

Is he top 10 talent? Probably not but he’s definitely in my ‘best of the rest ‘ group with a slew of Non- Elite QB’s.

But his contract supports that these contracts are more about the recent timing of their signings reflecting the current market than their status or ranking in the league.

 

[Zman5]

There’s been several franchise QB who were paid but haven't made the playoffs consistently.

Guys like Ryan , Stafford, Carr , Romo and Cousins for example come to mind to name a few who recently were paid some of the top contracts at the time they signed.

You can add DeShaun Watson to that list.

 

[ShaneFalco]

I'm actually trying to think of one, and I got nothing. Good post.

I don’t think you are...
LOL

 

[kskboys]

Is he top 10 talent? Probably not but he’s definitely in my ‘best of the rest ‘ group with a slew of Non- Elite QB’s.

But his contract supports that these contracts are more about the recent timing of their signings reflecting the current market than their status or ranking in the league.

No, Greg, it does not. Tannehill is the polar opposite of what you are claiming. His deal was signed in March 2020, well after most of those monster deals. His salary absolutely does not portray a "next man up" mentality.

 

[Diehardblues]

You can add DeShaun Watson to that list.

Id agree. Another great example how the current top paid QB’s don’t necessarily reflect their pecking order in the league.

It’s also a sound argument why Dak in the Watson 40 million range isn’t really out of whack. Cause it’s not based solely on their talent level.

In a couple years these won’t be the top salaries in the league.

 

[kskboys]

I don’t think you are...
LOL

I am!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Finally looked it up. It has never happened.

However, it's also only recently become a thing to hold a team hostage for a cap strapping team numbing contract.

 

[Diehardblues]

No, Greg, it does not. Tannehill is the polar opposite of what you are claiming. His deal was signed in March 2020, well after most of those monster deals. His salary absolutely does not portray a "next man up" mentality.

If I recall correctly , Mahomes and Watson’s deals were done well after that. Watsons deal was done in Sept 2020 and I believe Mahomes was July 2020.

The bigger point I was making K is that Tannehill by most wouldn’t be in their top 10 in the league while his current contract is. And in a couple years might not be in top 20 .

Dak could receive a contract that won’t reflect his pecking order in the league now similar to Watsons but in a couple years could be more in line.

 

[Denim Chicken]

There are many options but the more important question is, If we sign Dak to that contract, will we be able to contend now?

Yes, we can spread his guaranteed $ over the term of his contract & can restructure to create another $60 mil in cap space if needed.

It would be easier to improve defense with a cheaper QB for sure, but then you risk subpar QB play.

There is no one model to win & both have advantages & disadvantages.

 

[kskboys]

If I recall correctly , Mahomes and Watson’s deals were done well after that. Watsons deal was done in Sept 2020 and I believe Mahomes was July 2020.

The bigger point I was making K is that Tannehill by most wouldn’t be in their top 10 in the league while his current contract is.

No, Greg, you are claiming it's strictly a next man up sort of thing. It should not be. Tannehill was paid more in line w/ his talent. Wilson was before him. As were Cousins and Goff.

This idea that each QB must be paid more than the last one is one of the most inane ideas I've ever heard.

 

[kskboys]

Yes, we can spread his guaranteed $ over the term of his contract & can restructure to create another $60 mil in cap space if needed.

It would be easier to improve defense with a cheaper QB for sure, but then you risk subpar QB play.

There is no one model to win & both have advantages & disadvantages.

We can if he'll take a longer deal. We cannot if we bow to his weird demands and do a 4 year deal. Why do you think we're holding out for a longer deal? A shorter deal keeps us from winning.

 

[CouchCoach]

Dan Marino was 8-10 in the playoffs and got there 10 of his 16 seasons.

The one thing that is fact is that the expectations rise with the salary.

The first time a reporter caught up with Booger after the Romo deal was done, he was asked about the level of that contract. Booger responded "I expect him to play better because he's getting paid better". I do believe he believes that and while some feel his deals are for past contributions, I don't agree. He's a wildcatter and has mentioned on several occasions that his best wells were the highest risk because of the investment.

One thing I believe about Prescott, he is not the reason this team hasn't performed better. His record against the better teams has been used against him. Was he the only one playing those better teams? I do believe he's good enough to get it done, my doubts are about the team that surrounds him, particularly on the other side of the ball.

 

[Frozen700]

I heard this on my lunch break.. Good stuff.




Some facts.

Green Bay has made the playoffs 8 of last 10 years. The only 2 they didn't make it were McCarthy's final 2 seasons..

New Orleans has made it the last 4 years and 6 out of the last 10.

Seattle has only missed the playoffs 1 time with Russell Wilson.

Tom Brady has made the playoffs 10 out of the last 10 years. It's been awhile until since Tampa has been to the playoffs

Mahomes has went 3 years in a row.

This is why you pay the elite guys and let the not so elites walk if they want elite money.

Dak will just be a stats guy.

And that will always be after a team has more than a 2-3 score lead going into the fourth.

He's not that guy

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

My questions are often from a Devils Advocate mentality. I can be a critic of Dak and our ownership while still weighing in the options while taking into consideration what the powers that be mindset is. Which of course will ultimately make the determination. , not some anonymous fans.

There’s a solid argument on both sides pending your evaluation of our QB. I think most analyst , etc that have weighed in including some notable ex players and coaches who I generally give credence to like Troy and Jimmy feel Dak is enough to invest in. That said there are parameters which they of course aren’t going to openly debate.

In the end it comes down to do you think we can win with Dak. Regardless what we think I’d argue the powers that be believe we can. And that’s all that matters. Once that decision is made then we can dissect it but ultimately it’s the results of the team that will be the final judge. And that will be argued as well since those results depend also on the team building skills of our dysfunctional organization.

Our situation with Jethro is complicated cause his priorities with “ relative and interesting “ often differ from our priorities. Which of course we can critique as well.

Bottomline is do we think we can find another QB who can place us in the same position Dak can immediately. And if not , what direction do we go from here. Most likely many fans don’t have same mindset of powers that be within our organization.

But the biggest separation is do you believe Dak could be enough with the proper support. If you don’t then that will drive your decision. My hunch is our ownership believes Dak can . And if they do should go after him. And we’ll have to live with decision . And be prepared to critique it and the results thereof.

All of this is wrong, IMO. None of this is about anything I said. You mention "my evaluation" of Dak. What exactly is that evaluation?

None of this is about Dak. It's about what we can afford to do as a franchise with a contract and what we can do with the rest of the roster, once cap is committed to Prescott. That's what all of this really comes down to, IMO.

 

[ShaneFalco]

I am!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Finally looked it up. It has never happened.

However, it's also only recently become a thing to hold a team hostage for a cap strapping team numbing contract.

What are you talking about? It happens all the time.

 

[CATCH17]

All of this is wrong, IMO. None of this is about anything I said. You mention "my evaluation" of Dak. What exactly is that evaluation?

None of this is about Dak. It's about what we can afford to do as a franchise with a contract and what we can do with the rest of the roster, once cap is committed to Prescott. That's what all of this really comes down to, IMO.

Exactly..


The same people upset that we don’t want to pay Dak are the same people blaming defense and everything else which most of us agree with.

The difference is I don’t think we can get all of those things that the pay Dak crowd and I agree too that we need while paying him.

If he already had a Super Bowl I wouldn’t care if we paid him. I also wouldn’t care if he was elite.

But he’s a guy that would’ve won 7 or 8 games this year if he were lucky.. Andy Dalton can do that.

 

[Diehardblues]

All of this is wrong, IMO. None of this is about anything I said. You mention "my evaluation" of Dak. What exactly is that evaluation?

None of this is about Dak. It's about what we can afford to do as a franchise with a contract and what we can do with the rest of the roster, once cap is committed to Prescott. That's what all of this really comes down to, IMO.

Ok. Well our offensive supporting cast is already committed . The issue is rebuilding the defense which will have to be done thru the draft . Which should be affordable with Rookie contracts.

If we need Cap space in the coming years then I’d suggest considering letting others walk if their contribution doesn’t improve. There’s quite a laundry list of veterans we could release to loosen up Cap space. Some of which can’t stay on the field.

 

[kskboys]

What are you talking about? It happens all the time.

I have to throw that question back at you. I have no idea what you are talking about. QB's playing under the tag is rare. I had to look it up, didn't know that for sure.

Players holding their team hostage for cap strapping contracts has become much more frequent than in the past. If you're not aware of that, you're either very young or simply don't pay attention.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It doesn’t look like we can contend without him? Unless there’s something in the horizon we haven’t seen.

And I think that’s how our ownership , etc will view it. We know what we have with Dak. He’s taken us to the brink of a championship game a couple times. For most teams that’s enough to invest in.

And you base this on what? The argument can be made, rather easily, that we can't contend with him. We certainly haven't shown that we can over the last two seasons.

You have no idea where we are at in terms of cap, is that a fair statement? How can you reach a conclusion on what the team thinks if you don't understand what they are able to do from a financial prospective?