Chasing6
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 12,503
- Reaction score
- 6,436
Is Dak holding out?You're assuming that Prescott is more interested in winning than he is in getting a big contract. I don't make that assumption.
Is Dak holding out?You're assuming that Prescott is more interested in winning than he is in getting a big contract. I don't make that assumption.
He doesn't need to. He's going to get paid regardless.Is Dak holding out?
Then why not get paid playing for a winner?He doesn't need to. He's going to get paid regardless.
To say he wouldn’t have waived it if Lamb had been traded like he should’ve been if they are rebuilt is also a if statement. Guys with no trade clauses have been traded before.A lot of ifs in that statement. During FA, there was little to no chance that Prescott was going to waive it.
Which can be one and the same . You don’t think Lamb deserves to be paid top receiver money.Are you here to defend the team or the player? You don't sound like a DALLAS COWBOYS fan. You sound like a PLAYER fan.
This assumption is based on what?You're assuming that Prescott is more interested in winning than he is in getting a big contract. I don't make that assumption.
Not without agreement from the player.LOL. Come on Rocky, use that matter between your ears.
People bring this argument up to Dak fans and I don’t get it. You can be a Lamb fan and a Cowboy fan.Are you here to defend the team or the player? You don't sound like a DALLAS COWBOYS fan. You sound like a PLAYER fan.
What winning team that is a Super Bowl contender was going to trade for him?Then why not get paid playing for a winner?
The assumption that Dak doesn’t care about winning a SB is bizarre.
So it is strictly not about money.He doesn't need to. He's going to get paid regardless.
Lamb wasn't getting traded. It's a senseless argument.To say he wouldn’t have waived it if Lamb had been traded like he should’ve been if they are rebuilt is also a if statement. Guys with no trade clauses have been traded before.
That's the problem. THERE IS NO CAP FOR A PLAYER'S EVER INCREASING "MARKET VALUE".Which can be one and the same . You don’t think Lamb deserves to be paid top receiver money.
Or is just greed for anyone wanting Market Value?
It’s not these players responsibility to manage the Cap. If our ownership believes we can’t afford or build a team with such then we move on.
But that’s not on Lamb. He will get paid somewhere just like Prescott. That’s just typical business in the NFL.
Perhaps some fans lose sight the NFL is a business first. It is what it is AC.
It comes down to what’s in the best interest of the Cowboys. Can we afford him or not ? If not we move on and hopefully can get something for him. If not then it’s a huge blunder by our ownership.
Personally I can’t imagine Jethro letting him walk in FA. But anything is possible . Bottomline is Lamb deserves to be paid Market Price.
Have guys that did not want to be traded, been traded before? No they have not.To say he wouldn’t have waived it if Lamb had been traded like he should’ve been if they are rebuilt is also a if statement. Guys with no trade clauses have been traded before.
Right lol lol lolIt will not change. This is not a SB team. Maybe a wildcard at best. No reason to cave in. For all we know, Jerry thinks with out CD, Dak's numbers will go down and he will be easier to sign.
Or he thinks Dak will take less, to get CD signed.
Read my response to @Diehardblues . It should hopefully help you understand what my argument is and why.People bring this argument up to Dak fans and I don’t get it. You can be a Lamb fan and a Cowboy fan.
The owners ultimately have the last word . Can they afford or not. We wouldn’t be the first team to lose top receiver to FA.That's the problem. THERE IS NO CAP FOR A PLAYER'S EVER INCREASING "MARKET VALUE".
The ever increasing "Market Value" keeps surpassing the yearly salary cap.
You are so close…..Not without agreement from the player.
That's the problem. It's gotten out of control. We can all see it. Those "Market Value" salary cap percentage hits for certain positional players keeps getting higher and higher every year, higher than the team salary cap gets increased.The owners ultimately have the last word . Can they afford or not. We wouldn’t be the first team to lose top receiver to FA.
Again this is the business of the NFL. Top players bolt all the time for receiving their Market Value .
And as long as someone is willing to pay it , it will continue .