Percentage of salary cap by SB winning QB’s

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by boxer-rumble, Feb 18, 2020.

  1. Swagger

    Swagger Well-Known Member

    894 Messages
    848 Likes Received
    Good work and an interesting list.

    To be fair, Rodgers and Wilson are up against it regardless of how good they are given where they are in their career. Brees and Brady probably have one more season left. Falcons are up and down. How much longer will Big Ben play...

    From the list I think Wentz has the best chance of winning another Superbowl! The Eagles won the division last season with countless injuries so whether we like it or not, they have something going for them.

    If anything this reinforces the initial post - draft a quarterback.
  2. Hawkeye0202

    Hawkeye0202 Well-Known Member

    9,237 Messages
    15,828 Likes Received
    Just curious, raise your hand if you believe the Cowboys and 31 other NFL teams DO NOT already have this kind of data (LOL). Pretty sure their data isn't reduced whether or not they are paying their QB to win a Super Bowl. Instead, can he consistently put them in contention as divisional/playoff winner? Any NFL owner, GM, and coach will tell you their REALISTIC
    goal every year is winning the division and/or making the playoffs. Waaaay too many variables/factors impact whether or your team makes the big dance AND WIN IT after getting into the playoffs, many have nothing to do with your QB.
    Hell using this theory, Romo should have delivered a Super Bowl coz of his contract. Look at Brees who won one in 2009 but hasn't been back since. What do you do about his contract using this theory? John Elway who won his two Super Bowls riding Terrell Davis coattail. Waaay too many unanswered questions/factors to see how this impacts Dak ( or any QBs signing big contacts).
  3. Hawkeye0202

    Hawkeye0202 Well-Known Member

    9,237 Messages
    15,828 Likes Received

    :clap:Odd thread to say the least
    superonyx likes this.
  4. Swagger

    Swagger Well-Known Member

    894 Messages
    848 Likes Received
    I agree of course there are other variables.

    Perhaps GMs panic a bit. They come across a QB that is durable and fairly competent and are good with that. As a result they happily overpay in the fear of ending up with someone like Brandon Weeden or Matt Cassel. But such a tactic has historically not paid off in assisting a team in winning a Superbowl as these stats/data quite clearly show.

    Or the GMs overrate the actual ability of their QB and overpay.
    DenCWBY and Hawkeye0202 like this.
  5. boxer-rumble

    boxer-rumble Well-Known Member

    2,437 Messages
    4,759 Likes Received
    Way to take it to the extreme. No one ever said you CANT win a SB with a highly paid QB. The list shows it’s just much harder.

    And your list shows at least half those guys are either retired, about to retire, or injured. Do you honestly think any of those QBs will win another SB? I think RW has a chance but other than that...
    DenCWBY and kskboys like this.
  6. Swagger

    Swagger Well-Known Member

    894 Messages
    848 Likes Received
    To be fair to Jerry & son, the 2015 season when we were left with Weeden and Cassel after Romo went down was so depressing that I can understand why they would be happy to keep Prescott. He's durable and solid and won't lose games like the aforementioned two.

    You do have to wonder if that has played a part in their decision regarding Prescott's contract.

    I'm of the view that it's the wrong decision but I can fully understand it.

    Wow 2015 was painful. Shame Sean Lee couldn't have had that season in 2014 :(
  7. Hawkeye0202

    Hawkeye0202 Well-Known Member

    9,237 Messages
    15,828 Likes Received
  8. kskboys

    kskboys Well-Known Member

    18,412 Messages
    20,591 Likes Received
    We also have the opposite data. Brees, Flacco, and Wilson so far have been failing in the playoffs, mostly due to not having a good enough team around them. This is just one part of the data.
  9. aikemirv

    aikemirv Well-Known Member

    12,337 Messages
    5,230 Likes Received
    But I read that whole thread about it being a myth!!
  10. kskboys

    kskboys Well-Known Member

    18,412 Messages
    20,591 Likes Received
    Yup. It's just one part of a much larger equation. To be more accurate, one would have to take into account all the championship game participants, and then take into consideration the reasons teams didn't make the playoffs or fizzled out early in the playoffs.
  11. Adreme

    Adreme Active Member

    275 Messages
    163 Likes Received
    This was supposed to be a rebuild year for Seattle. Flacco is not in the same league as Wilson and Brees, especially after his injuries where he looked like a shell of what he was after the ACL, but the Saints are always in the hunt for a SB. Considering how deep the NFC is to always be able to be in the hunt for a SB is what you are paying for. Actually getting there is largely either luck or being BB.
  12. xwalker

    xwalker Well-Known Member

    45,657 Messages
    45,535 Likes Received
    In 2012 Payton Manning signed a 5 year, 96M contract.

    The NFL cap in 2012 was 120.6M.

    96/5 = 19.2

    19.2 is 15.92% of 120.6

    Flacco played 2012 in a 5th year option after declining a contract offer. Following the Super Bowl he signed a contract averaging 20.1M.

    20.1M as a percent of the cap:
    2012: 16.67%
    2013: 16.34M

    Foles was not the starter most of that season.

    Brady throws off all calculations of this type because the Patriots pay his nutrition/performance company millions per year and his wife makes tens of millions per year.

    The only info that this list provides is that teams should draft QBs even if they already have a good one. If the Raven had drafted a mid-round QB during Flacco's first 5 years that could have taken over, then they could have avoided giving Flacco a 6 year, 120M contract AND they could have Franchised and traded Flacco for a decent pick or picks.

    I've just convinced myself that teams should draft a QB in the 4th every year and occasionally in the 3rd or 2nd.

    That would have more value than a successful 4th round pick of a decent non-QB such as a Chris Canty or Anthony Hitchens type player.

    If Romo had been in his prime, but had missed 2016, Dak would have netted a 1st round pick in 2017 if Romo had returned as the starter for 2017 OR Romo would have netted picks if he had been traded.
    Kaiser and boxer-rumble like this.
  13. Oz-of-Cowboy-Country

    Oz-of-Cowboy-Country Well-Known Member

    3,619 Messages
    4,207 Likes Received
    The data is basically saying, once you give your QB a huge contract ...your chances of winning a Superbowl soon after diminishes. As the salary cap continues to increase, that huge contractual percentage goes down and your chances of winning goes up. So if that percentage is high your chances are low. As that percentage decreases your chances increase.

    This is basic football knowledge for anyone who has been following the NFL since 1994, IMO.

    So Dak wanting one short contract after another will put and keep us in the dog house. Because his percentage will always be high. Hence the hold up in negotiations. Signing a long term deal is what's better for the team. But signing short deal after short deal works out better for Dak.

    If he's going to be that greedy then let him walk. Cause if a "player option" clause can't get him to sign then he is being greedy.
    boxer-rumble and kskboys like this.
  14. kskboys

    kskboys Well-Known Member

    18,412 Messages
    20,591 Likes Received
    Of course. However, there's a ton more work to be done than what you're doing before coming to your conclusion.

    Luck? Sure, that's important. Always is. However, there's also coaching, and many other factors. One of which is having the correct players who can make plays at the right time. Does KC make those stops on D that won them the game w/o Frank Clark, Okafor, Mathieu, Hitchens, and Tanoh? It wasn't luck that they were able to sign those guys, it was salary cap room.

    Saints are in the hunt now, but overpaying Brees first led them to 3 years of mediocrity. And why do they keep losing in the playoffs? Are they maybe lacking that one or two players that would put them over the top?

    You simply cannot discount the talent aspect using catch words such as "luck". That's silly.
  15. daboyzruleperiod

    daboyzruleperiod ♡☆

    20,535 Messages
    48,171 Likes Received
    o_O You just spoke present & past tense in one sentence.
  16. Adreme

    Adreme Active Member

    275 Messages
    163 Likes Received
    The team that wins the Super Bowl, among the teams with the coaching and talent to get there, is generally the healthiest team and whichever team is healthiest is January is largely luck.

    Beyond that though would the Seahawks have been anything more than an 8-8 team at best if instead of Wilson they had 2 random great defensive players? Right now without him they are a 4 win team. RIght now without Brees the Saints would be 8-8. The rookie wage scale is a powerful tool and allows teams to have young talent but it has not existed long enough to say that teams cannot win paying their franchise QB. The only thing we can say, because we do have enough data to say that, is that teams that pay for those QBs are far more likely to make the playoffs and if you make the playoffs you have a shot.
    Kaiser likes this.
  17. DFWJC

    DFWJC Well-Known Member

    47,058 Messages
    33,984 Likes Received
    Generally, like Bob's work, but if we're looking at SB winners....well, he is wrong.
  18. kskboys

    kskboys Well-Known Member

    18,412 Messages
    20,591 Likes Received
    You're changing the parameters. We're not discussing just making the playoffs. If that is your goal, then overpaying isn't that big of an issue.

    Of course they'd be less w/o Wilson. However, flip that. If they had a quality player or two more, they might've advanced to the super bowl.

    Health? Well, of course. That's just stating the obvious. But, health is by far not the only factor. Talent is far and away #1, followed by coaching.
  19. Mr Cowboy

    Mr Cowboy Well-Known Member

    19,228 Messages
    19,808 Likes Received
    I highly recommend reading Bob's article. He not only uses the SB winning QBs, but uses the final 4 QBs for comparison. His conclusions makes lots of sense.

    Last edited: Feb 19, 2020
  20. doomsday9084

    doomsday9084 Well-Known Member

    471 Messages
    730 Likes Received
    This has been posted in other threads but is worth its own.

    There will always be some NFL team with an elite quarterback on his rookie deal. That team (let's call them Kansas City) will always have a massive advantage over a team paying their QB $35m. The difference in salaries is the equivalent of multiple pro bowl players at other positions. While its possible to overcome this with fantastic drafting, a huge QB salary to an elite QB is like a handicap weight on a horse. A huge QB salary to an average QB is like a boat anchor on a horse.

    I will also add that the positional scarcity at the QB position isn't what it was decades ago. Lots of people can throw the ball. IMO, a lot of QB success is based on coaching, offensive line play and even defense/special teams. If you put a guy who can throw the ball in a position to succeed, he probably will.
    JustChip and boxer-rumble like this.

Share This Page