Nate Burleson on Dak-Pay him!

[CowboyRoy]

No, the question I asked was not, how many QBs have one in the last three years. The question I asked is how many of the top 10 QB salaries have actually won a Championship since signing their contracts? I mean, it's a fairly straight forward question here. You are making it too difficult. Who many of those guys have won a SB since they signed their contract?

I suspect why you don't want to answer this question. I'm actually not surprised that you won't answer because you know the answer already and you also know that it doesn't support your views, I suspect.

Maybe you should talk to someone else about your dumb theory and ask them your meaningless question.

How many women have won the SB in the last 5 years?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

He did not have any issues. That is a fact. If you want to dispute that, state your case.
If you recall, the first hint of a concern with Tony’s back was the cyst they found. Tony signed his extension in March of 2013. The cyst was found two months later.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap10...-romo-cyst-found-after-i-signed-108m-contract

Tony did not have any injury concerns when the contract was signed and had just come off two straight seasons of starting every game.

Look, we clearly don't agree here. Tony signed his last contract in 2013. There were rumors about Tony's back issues going back at least two seasons, prior to 2013. The year he signed his deal, 2013, he actually suffered a ruptured disk, in 2014 Transverse ruptures, which didn't happen in 2014. That problem existed for a while prior to the the actual rupture. That happened because of the initial injuries, over time. This is to way nothing of the should/collar bone issue prior to. If you don't believe there was any proof, that's fine. However, I am not wrong about the fact that I had issues because of his injuries and that, at the time, I voiced those concerns and I was not alone. Those posts are here on this board somewhere. You are welcome to go back and read them if you wish. I'm not lying when I say that I, and others, had concerns over his physical issues and his age.

 

[CowboyRoy]

No, the question I asked was not, how many QBs have one in the last three years. The question I asked is how many of the top 10 QB salaries have actually won a Championship since signing their contracts? I mean, it's a fairly straight forward question here. You are making it too difficult. Who many of those guys have won a SB since they signed their contract?

I suspect why you don't want to answer this question. I'm actually not surprised that you won't answer because you know the answer already and you also know that it doesn't support your views, I suspect.

-How many Garrett coached teams have won a SB in the last 12 years?
-Dallas had a QB on a 400k salary for the last 3 years so why didn't they win a SB? After all doesn't your theory claim that paying QB's low salaries is the recipe for winning the SB?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Maybe you should talk to someone else about your dumb theory and ask them your meaningless question.

How many women have won the SB in the last 5 years?

Apparently. However, I have to wonder why it is you don't seem to want to answer the question. I think we both know why. I'll take the fact that you won't answer the question and have gone out of your way to call it stupid, as answer enough.

Thanks for playing Roy.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Look, we clearly don't agree here. Tony signed his last contract in 2013. There were rumors about Tony's back issues going back at least two seasons, prior to 2013. The year he signed his deal, 2013, he actually suffered a ruptured disk, in 2014 Transverse ruptures, which didn't happen in 2014. That problem existed for a while prior to the the actual rupture. That happened because of the initial injuries, over time. This is to way nothing of the should/collar bone issue prior to. If you don't believe there was any proof, that's fine. However, I am not wrong about the fact that I had issues because of his injuries and that, at the time, I voiced those concerns and I was not alone. Those posts are here on this board somewhere. You are welcome to go back and read them if you wish. I'm not lying when I say that I, and others, had concerns over his physical issues and his age.

I had concerns as well. That's why I wanted to move on to Dak. Its not like the Cowboys were winning the SB with a healthy Romo anyway.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Apparently. However, I have to wonder why it is you don't seem to want to answer the question. I think we both know why. I'll take the fact that you won't answer the question and have gone out of your way to call it stupid, as answer enough.

Thanks for playing Roy.

When you come up with a legitimate question that has merit, I will be glad to answer. Ironic how you haven't answered any of mine either. Most of the highest paid QB contracts have JUST BEEN SIGNED RECENTLY. As in 1-3 years ago. Its the nature of the latest, biggest contracts. So to take 3 years only and ask your question is rather dumb. Especially since Tom Brady has been beating everyone during that time. Unless you are going to claim that Philly won the SB last year because of Foles 20 million dollar contract? is that what you are claiming? OR are you claiming that the Patriots win because Tom Brady takes a pay cut and no because he is just the best QB in the NFL? If Tom Brady was getting 30 million they would still have won. Unless you are also claiming that 12 million in cap room was the difference between them winning or not?

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Look, we clearly don't agree here. Tony signed his last contract in 2013. There were rumors about Tony's back issues going back at least two seasons, prior to 2013. The year he signed his deal, 2013, he actually suffered a ruptured disk, in 2014 Transverse ruptures, which didn't happen in 2014. That problem existed for a while prior to the the actual rupture. That happened because of the initial injuries, over time. This is to way nothing of the should/collar bone issue prior to. If you don't believe there was any proof, that's fine. However, I am not wrong about the fact that I had issues because of his injuries and that, at the time, I voiced those concerns and I was not alone. Those posts are here on this board somewhere. You are welcome to go back and read them if you wish. I'm not lying when I say that I, and others, had concerns over his physical issues and his age.

I’m not saying anyone is lying, you are just misremembering. There weren’t any issues before he signed his contract. Again, this is a fact.
Any issues you would have had at the time of the contract would have been from broken bones from years ago. Broken bones aren’t chronic and there isn’t any medical reason to think they will reoccur.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

-How many Garrett coached teams have won a SB in the last 12 years?
-Dallas had a QB on a 400k salary for the last 3 years so why didn't they win a SB? After all doesn't your theory claim that paying QB's low salaries is the recipe for winning the SB?

None, is this your way of asking me if I think Garrett should be given a new contract of if he should be the head coach? Let me just nip this in the bud, right quick. The answer is: No and no. There, we can now move on from the whole Garrett, switch and bait tactic.

I think it's really funny, and I say that very tongue in cheek, that you ask me a question yet you don't answer the question you have been asked repeatedly.

The issue being discussed is a new contract. Your point of our QB playing for 400K, which is completely wrong BTW, it's a rookie deal so there is not a lot of negotiations over what he gets paid on a rookie deal. Where are you going with this? Are you trying to link slotted salaries with a lack of championships? IF you are, i feel as if I really need to tell you that I think that angle has no legs to stand on Roy. Just saying.

LOL........

This board is crazy today. It's like shooting fish in a barrel.

Seriously though, if what you got out of this is that my point is that only QBs with low salaries can win, then you are never going to be able to engage in this or any conversation. I mean, seriously here, and I know you have this habit of not answering questions presented to you, be that as it may, where did I ever say such a thing? Where did I even remotely say anything like that?

Let me save you the embarrassment, if that is possible, and say that I never said anything like that. You are simply trying to redirect. Fair contracts are one thing and I have not seen one person who is against signing Dak to a fair contract but that's not the discussion is it? Don't try to paint me with your own brush. You can't win that. Signing Dak to a 25/30 million a year deal is a bad deal for us and for him IMO. You may not agree with that and that's your choice but I can defend my opinions rationally. You, I'm not seeing that from you. I'm seeing just the opposite, to this point.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I’m not saying anyone is lying, you are just misremembering. There weren’t any issues before he signed his contract. Again, this is a fact.
Any issues you would have had at the time of the contract would have been from broken bones from years ago. Broken bones aren’t chronic and there isn’t any medical reason to think they will reoccur.

I'm not misrembering anything. I'm telling you the discussions that I had over that situation specifically. For you to try and tell me what I would have been doing at that time is a bit of a stretch. I am aware of the broken ribs, the broken fingers and the broken collar bones. That was not the concern at the time. Certainly didn't help but that was not the concern. I'm just telling you the truth. There was a lot of discussion around his back, even then and it was discussed a lot, on this board, at the time. Perhaps it is not I who is misrembering here.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

I'm not misrembering anything. I'm telling you the discussions that I had over that situation specifically. For you to try and tell me what I would have been doing at that time is a bit of a stretch. I am aware of the broken ribs, the broken fingers and the broken collar bones. That was not the concern at the time. Certainly didn't help but that was not the concern. I'm just telling you the truth. There was a lot of discussion around his back, even then and it was discussed a lot, on this board, at the time. Perhaps it is not I who is misrembering here.

Nah, I’m pretty sure you’re misremembering. This board isn’t easy to search, but I did a basic search and I can’t find any evidence of people with concerns about Tony’s back before that contract was signed. At this point I actually hope someone can find it, because it would be an interesting read. Even if they were, it would have been completely unfounded because there was zero evidence he had any kind of a back problem at the time.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Answer THIS question:

How many QB's have won a championship over the last 5 years besides Tom Brady?

Wait for it...………………...2

The problem is not the QB salaries, but Tom Brady and Bellichick

The other two were Manning and Foles.

The problem is the Salary and what it does, or more to the point, prevents you from doing. Brady and the Pats have been able to bring in help and they have been able to keep key personnel because of their cap flexibility. And also, let me ask you this, why just 5 years? Why not 10? Is it because in the last 10 years, there have been 7 different winners and your "theory" falls completely apart? I think we both know that the answer to that is probably yes, that is exactly why you limit it to only 5 seasons.

But hey, you asked the question so lets go ahead and look at it. So cap flexibility doesn't effect anything? OK, who were the two teams?

It's Philly in 2018, who had a QB situation that paid their starter on a rookie deal and the eventual SB winning backup on a contract deal that paid him 8.7 Mil in base salary with incentives that could pay up to 31.9 mil with incentives over two seasons. In the SB winning year, I believe that Foles actually made 7 million. That allowed Philly to make several key FA acquisitions. and this is a known fact.

The other was Denver who had Manning at the time. Manning's base salary was 15 million in that year and Denver was able to have cap flexibility to sign
DWare, Talib, TJ Ward, Darian Stewart, Evan Mathis, Owen Daniels and Emmanual Sanders, to say nothing of Manning himself. All of those guys were FA signings who were starters on that team.

If anything, this only goes to show just how important it is to sign your QB to good and financially sound contract. I mean, virtually ever single team who has won the Super Bowl in the last 5 years has done so because they were able to take advantage of reasonable QB contracts.

I mean, this is plain as day. It's like a blast door that is closed, right in front of you and yet, you still walk head long it.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Nah, I’m pretty sure you’re misremembering. This board isn’t easy to search, but I did a basic search and I can’t find any evidence of people with concerns about Tony’s back before that contract was signed. At this point I actually hope someone can find it, because it would be an interesting read. Even if they were, it would have been completely unfounded because there was zero evidence he had any kind of a back problem at the time.

Yeah, I'm sure you are pretty sure but whatever. I know what I discussed then, you don't, by your own admission. You can't find anything but you are pretty sure it's here. It is here and I know what was discussed then, on my behalf. It's fine, it is what it is. You want to believe it was misremembering, so be it.

The fact remains, it was sound then and it has been proven to be sound over the years. The injury question was legit and it's been proven.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

When you come up with a legitimate question that has merit, I will be glad to answer. Ironic how you haven't answered any of mine either. Most of the highest paid QB contracts have JUST BEEN SIGNED RECENTLY. As in 1-3 years ago. Its the nature of the latest, biggest contracts. So to take 3 years only and ask your question is rather dumb. Especially since Tom Brady has been beating everyone during that time. Unless you are going to claim that Philly won the SB last year because of Foles 20 million dollar contract? is that what you are claiming? OR are you claiming that the Patriots win because Tom Brady takes a pay cut and no because he is just the best QB in the NFL? If Tom Brady was getting 30 million they would still have won. Unless you are also claiming that 12 million in cap room was the difference between them winning or not?

LOL..... I don't believe this. I don't believe you are capable of answering any question put to you Roy. Go ahead, prove me wrong.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Yeah, I'm sure you are pretty sure but whatever. I know what I discussed then, you don't, by your own admission. You can't find anything but you are pretty sure it's here. It is here and I know what was discussed then, on my behalf. It's fine, it is what it is. You want to believe it was misremembering, so be it.

The fact remains, it was sound then and it has been proven to be sound over the years. The injury question was legit and it's been proven.

It isn’t sound and no it wasn’t proven. No one talked about it then because it didn’t exist. You are misremembering.
And uh, you do realize the easiest way to prove that it did happen is to simply produce the posts where you are actually doing what you claim? If you don’t feel like it or don’t want to that’s fine, but maybe spare us both the drama and just let this post be the end, eh?

 

[CowboyRoy]

None, is this your way of asking me if I think Garrett should be given a new contract of if he should be the head coach? Let me just nip this in the bud, right quick. The answer is: No and no. There, we can now move on from the whole Garrett, switch and bait tactic.

I think it's really funny, and I say that very tongue in cheek, that you ask me a question yet you don't answer the question you have been asked repeatedly.

The issue being discussed is a new contract. Your point of our QB playing for 400K, which is completely wrong BTW, it's a rookie deal so there is not a lot of negotiations over what he gets paid on a rookie deal. Where are you going with this? Are you trying to link slotted salaries with a lack of championships? IF you are, i feel as if I really need to tell you that I think that angle has no legs to stand on Roy. Just saying.

LOL........

This board is crazy today. It's like shooting fish in a barrel.

Seriously though, if what you got out of this is that my point is that only QBs with low salaries can win, then you are never going to be able to engage in this or any conversation. I mean, seriously here, and I know you have this habit of not answering questions presented to you, be that as it may, where did I ever say such a thing? Where did I even remotely say anything like that?

Let me save you the embarrassment, if that is possible, and say that I never said anything like that. You are simply trying to redirect. Fair contracts are one thing and I have not seen one person who is against signing Dak to a fair contract but that's not the discussion is it? Don't try to paint me with your own brush. You can't win that. Signing Dak to a 25/30 million a year deal is a bad deal for us and for him IMO. You may not agree with that and that's your choice but I can defend my opinions rationally. You, I'm not seeing that from you. I'm seeing just the opposite, to this point.

You havent presented a rational defense yet.

 

[CowboyRoy]

The problem is the Salary and what it does, or more to the point, prevents you from doing. Brady and the Pats have been able to bring in help and they have been able to keep key personnel because of their cap flexibility. And also, let me ask you this, why just 5 years? Why not 10? Is it because in the last 10 years, there have been 7 different winners and your "theory" falls completely apart? I think we both know that the answer to that is probably yes, that is exactly why you limit it to only 5 seasons.

But hey, you asked the question so lets go ahead and look at it. So cap flexibility doesn't effect anything? OK, who were the two teams?



It's Philly in 2018, who had a QB situation that paid their starter on a rookie deal and the eventual SB winning backup on a contract deal that paid him 8.7 Mil in base salary with incentives that could pay up to 31.9 mil with incentives over two seasons. In the SB winning year, I believe that Foles actually made 7 million. That allowed Philly to make several key FA acquisitions. and this is a known fact.

The other was Denver who had Manning at the time. Manning's base salary was 15 million in that year and Denver was able to have cap flexibility to sign
DWare, Talib, TJ Ward, Darian Stewart, Evan Mathis, Owen Daniels and Emmanual Sanders, to say nothing of Manning himself. All of those guys were FA signings who were starters on that team.

If anything, this only goes to show just how important it is to sign your QB to good and financially sound contract. I mean, virtually ever single team who has won the Super Bowl in the last 5 years has done so because they were able to take advantage of reasonable QB contracts.

I mean, this is plain as day. It's like a blast door that is closed, right in front of you and yet, you still walk head long it.

Its 5 because that more than covers all the signings of that list of QB's you mentioned. Try to keep up.

LOL........Brady has won the SB 3 of the last 5 years. All you can draw from that is that Tom Brady and Belli are the best.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It isn’t sound and no it wasn’t proven. No one talked about it then because it didn’t exist. You are misremembering.
And uh, you do realize the easiest way to prove that it did happen is to simply produce the posts where you are actually doing what you claim? If you don’t feel like it or don’t want to that’s fine, but maybe spare us both the drama and just let this post be the end, eh?

Yes it was but whatever and yes, it was proven. The fact that we are barely getting his contract off the books and the fact that he was on the shelf for an extended period of time, the fact that doctors recommended he retire from Football, that is all proof of the fact that it was accurate and those with health concerns and that contract were right and that you, right now are wrong. All of those things are proof but yeah, you go ahead and believe what you wish. I'm not gonna argue the point any further with you.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

You havent presented a rational defense yet.

In your opinion but honestly, it's not on me to defend anything to you. You haven't even answered the question I posed. What am I supposed to be defending, to the likes of you?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Its 5 because that more than covers all the signings of that list of QB's you mentioned. Try to keep up.

LOL........Brady has won the SB 3 of the last 5 years. All you can draw from that is that Tom Brady and Belli are the best.

This is funny, you haven't answered the question over contracts so why would it be pertinent to what you asked? Either way, I responded to the 5, ask weak as that was, and I showed you that in fact, QB contracts, as related to cap are in fact extremely important. Interestingly enough, thou not surprisingly, you have not addressed that.

 

[CowboyRoy]

In your opinion but honestly, it's not on me to defend anything to you. You haven't even answered the question I posed. What am I supposed to be defending, to the likes of you?

You still havent even made a point yet. What is your point?