Percentage of salary cap by SB winning QB’s

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

  1. doomsday9084

    doomsday9084 Well-Known Member

    471 Messages
    730 Likes Received
    What Bob is missing is that most NFL QB's are vets making reasonable amounts of money . . . or more. There aren't dozens of teams with elite QB's on their rookie deals to fill out the playoffs. That said, they win . . . A LOT.
     
    boxer-rumble and DFWJC like this.
  2. Kaiser

    Kaiser Zone Supporter

    12,913 Messages
    21,691 Likes Received
    Another factor in this discussion is the NFL has become much more of an offense league and passing league since the start of that list, which puts a lot more emphasis on having a top QB.
     
  3. Adreme

    Adreme Active Member

    275 Messages
    163 Likes Received
    I am trying to make the parameters something we can actually measure. We do not have enough data to measure how much of a contract you can give a QB and still have a shot at a SB because there have only been like 5 or 6 since the rookie wage scale changed contracts and we have things like the Patriots making so many as an outlier number to make winning it even close to statistically significant. Therefore the only data that we can draw on that has a statistically significant amount of points is the numbers of teams over that span to either make the playoffs or the divisional round. From that data we can see a large number of the teams that make it that far fall into one of two categories: they either have a superstar QB under a long-term deal, or they have one under a rookie deal. What we generally do not see is teams that everything but that caliber of QB there.

    From that data we can extrapolate that you can pay the QB and still make it there but you MUST have the QB to make it there or you must have hit on the vast majority of your other picks.

    One of the reasons it does become harder to win after you sign the QB is not that he is taking up cap but that its harder to get better players when you win more. When you are winning more games AND have to draft well the degree of difficulty is very high. Flacco was cited earlier in the thread, but the interesting thing about that is after they had a bad 3 year run of 2015-2017 and they had some high draft picks they were able to massively reload on talent which was not available to them. They got a top 3 LT, a top 5 CB, a top 3 ILB with just the 1st round picks. Then you throw in multiple pass rushers who will get paid, some top TEs, a great RT, etc. which was not happening when they were drafting in the 20s every year. When you draft in the teens and top 10 for even just a year or two you can massively reload (and if you have the ability to find late round gems which they Cowboys are not great at).

    Whether you pay the QB is not the issue, but the issue is that by the time you are paying that contract you have probably been drafting pretty high for several years in a row and will be for at least a few more so there will be a talent deficit between the players you recently drafted versus the players you drafted when you got that QB.
     
  4. Jake

    Jake Curmudgeon

    18,736 Messages
    34,831 Likes Received
    I doubt the guy who put that list together 5 years ago had any "narrative" here. :rolleyes:

    You'd know that if you actually clicked the link, but zeroing in on that one year fit YOUR narrative.

    https://overthecap.com/super-bowl-titles-high-salary-quarterbacks/
     
    boxer-rumble likes this.
  5. Kevinicus

    Kevinicus Well-Known Member

    16,067 Messages
    8,813 Likes Received
    I think the emphasis is less. It's much easier to throw in today's NFL, so they don't have to be as good. Especially, if you have a stacked team around them.
     
  6. Verdict

    Verdict Well-Known Member

    20,609 Messages
    14,184 Likes Received
    None of this can be viewed in a vacuum. For instance if you were paying Dak even $50m per year (which would be an absurd amount to pay him) but the rest of the team had zero top level contracts it wouldn’t eliminate the team from winning.

    But under that same scenario you have Dak making $50m per year, and Amari getting paid $21m per year and Tank making $20m per year and Byron making $17m per year and The Ewok and Jaylon also making bank it’s going to be pretty hard to sign ANYONE of consequence in free agency and you better hit on every one
    of your draft picks or you will have zero depth.

    The salary cap matters. Dak’s contract is going to sting. But realistically Tank, Cooper, Jaylon and the high dollar OL are going to gut this team if we pay them all.

    You can’t pay everyone for very long before you are back in cap hell. I would seriously consider trading both Amari AND/OR Byron and replacing them. And the Tank contract is an albatross. We should have flipped him for picks too.
     
    kskboys and boxer-rumble like this.
  7. Kaiser

    Kaiser Zone Supporter

    12,913 Messages
    21,691 Likes Received
    My reaction is the opposite. I think if you tracked average salaries among the top guys at each position the QB and WR positions would increase more. I found a Wiki site that has those numbers and I haven't crunched the numbers but it looks like that for the last five years that is the case but not the last ten -

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franchise_tag

    I haven't crunched the numbers and I can definitely see how you would see the numbers not showing any trend at all though. I'm going to send the Bat Signal out to @xwalker on the numbers.
     
    xwalker likes this.
  8. Kevinicus

    Kevinicus Well-Known Member

    16,067 Messages
    8,813 Likes Received
    Salaries are going up, but that doesn't mean QBs importance to the game has gone up. I think now more than ever, mediocre QBs can be productive with the right supporting cast.

    I think the rules have made it easier, so a lesser skilled/experienced QB can survive better than they would in the past. And, I think that's why we're seeing more early success from young QBs.
     
    numnuts23 and Kaiser like this.
  9. VaqueroTD

    VaqueroTD Active Member

    123 Messages
    247 Likes Received
    It's definitely easier to be a QB these days, but I think the young QBs are better prepared for the NFL these days. Used to be you had college offenses that NFL teams wouldn't even touch, but now they're taking these college offenses and going with them, especially the ones that benefit mobile QBs.

    All the early surprise young QBs go on to be franchise QBs with high salaries, or crash and burn, so it still doesn't do much about the cap situation.

    That list of Super Bowl winning QBs is almost entirely all franchise QBs, so no, you still need a franchise QB to win it all.
     
  10. kskboys

    kskboys Well-Known Member

    18,410 Messages
    20,591 Likes Received
    Since no one has paid their Qb a monster amount and won a super bowl, it appears that you are wrong.

    I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that overpaying your QB has no effect. Very strange take, especially since all data points the other way. You're ignoring a ton of facts to conclude that.
     
  11. JoeKing

    JoeKing Diehard Zone Supporter

    19,423 Messages
    16,028 Likes Received
    This is a huge conflation of one thing (QB salary) having some magical effect on another thing (probability to win SB). In reality, these two things are not related other than having a poor QB decreasing odds of winning at all. Otherwise, every team would just max pay their QB and automatically increase their odds to win the SB. Just writing that down sounds stupid. How can people believe QB salary has a direct correlation with odds to win the SB? Good QBs get paid more but being paid more has absolutely nothing to do with odds to win the SB. It's common sense that the more you pay any one player, the fewer resources you have to pay other players, but that's not the same thing at all. It's a team sport, folks. Winning the SB is a team achievement, not an individual achievement, no matter how much they are paid.
     
  12. Adreme

    Adreme Active Member

    275 Messages
    163 Likes Received
    Because we literally have only 4-6 relevant years in the current time frame (one of which includes a drastically overpaid Peyton Manning for what he provided). This is not enough to base data off of and the alternative theory that the act of having a QB worth paying for 4 years before paying him meant your team was drafting lower and therefore the talent coming in behind him is worse so around that time is when the drop off should start being felt is just as valid a theory. Either way though, if you want a statistically relevant sample size before you start drawing conclusions about data, and you want that sample to be free of extra noise. Picking SB winners does not do that. Its like saying it has not rained on the past 5 February 20th's so therefore it cannot rain on February 20th.

    Therefore my methodology involved growing the sample size to a relevant data size and one that was free of noise and when you do that you notice that teams with a great QB, regardless of whether they are under a rookie contract or not, are the ones that make it to the playoffs and championship games and that the status of their contracts are largely immaterial. Whether he is on a rookie deal or not does not matter, what matters is that you have the QB.
     
    jaythecowboy likes this.
  13. kskboys

    kskboys Well-Known Member

    18,410 Messages
    20,591 Likes Received
    That's not what it points toward. I have no idea why you're trying to spin this, are you Dak's agent?

    If the bloated QB contract doesn't matter, then why haven't Wilson and Brees and Flacco been back?
     
  14. kskboys

    kskboys Well-Known Member

    18,410 Messages
    20,591 Likes Received
    You just contradicted yourself!!!! Funny stuff!!!!!!!!!

    Football is a team sport. Therefore, the better players you have, the better chance you have. Those fewer resources you referenced are often the difference. Ask ol' Russ, he'll confirm!!!!
     
  15. sean10mm

    sean10mm Well-Known Member

    1,763 Messages
    2,683 Likes Received
    Even teams that have elite QBs on their first contract normally don't win the Super Bowl.

    A bunch of QBs who are basically glorified stiffs have won Super Bowls.

    The team with the worse roster on paper wins the Super Bowl pretty regularly.

    None of this adds up to anything unless a team just goes kookoobananas paying some guy unprecedented money to do nothing or something like that.
     
  16. Adreme

    Adreme Active Member

    275 Messages
    163 Likes Received
    Back to the playoffs? With the exception of Flacco (whose 3 seasons after were losing best 2 weapons, AFC divisional round and one non 6th string CB from beating pats, ACL tear into being done), they are all making the playoffs. Again we have 4-6 years of data for Super Bowl teams inside of the rookie wage scale. 4-6 years is NOT a statistically significant sample size so drawing any conclusions on it will be a mistake.

    The only data pool with enough data to create a comparison is the data on teams that are making the playoffs and we can probably even go to the divisional round. THAT data suggests, to an overwhelming degree, that you need a franchise guy to make it that far. He can be on a rookie deal OR the mega deal and you will still make it there, but if you do not have him you are not making it that far.

    If I flip a coin 4 times and get heads all 4 that does not mean its impossible for it to be tails which is why 4 flips is not statistically significant though if you are really going to take the position that the Saints, who are perennial Super Bowl contenders (would ANYONE have been shocked if they won it all), and the Seahawks, who got this far in a year where they were expected to be in rebuild mode, are examples of why NOT to pay a franchise guy then I cannot think you are being serious. How many teams would LOVE to be the Saints and Seahawks right now.
     
  17. JoeKing

    JoeKing Diehard Zone Supporter

    19,423 Messages
    16,028 Likes Received
    :rolleyes:
     
    kskboys likes this.
  18. DandyDon52

    DandyDon52 Well-Known Member

    11,076 Messages
    6,545 Likes Received
    ok based on 2020 cap being 200 mil what is 12% of 200 mil ? 10% is 20 mil , my math not so good,
    but I think it is 24 mil, which isnt much.
    So anything over 24 mil is too much no matter who the qb is.
    rumour is 2021 cap is 250 mil, but even then it is only about 30 mil.
    So maybe qb's should only be paid 12% of cap and with each new cap their yearly salary goes up
    with the cap so it is always 12 %
    They could then decide on a % for each position and not overpay on any other position also.

    I now wonder what SB RB's % is so we can see if ewok is now over the limit lol.
    If KC pays mahomes 50 mil, it will be way over 12 % which could mean no more SB's for them,
    so why overpay him either??
     
    boxer-rumble likes this.
  19. kskboys

    kskboys Well-Known Member

    18,410 Messages
    20,591 Likes Received
    Making the playoffs? That's your goal? Why isn't your goal making the super bowl?

    I think you've talked in circles so much you've made yourself dizzy!!!!!!!!!!!!

    The data pool that you keep ignoring is how many extra players you can buy w/ the money saved from not overpaying one position. The data is that overpaying a position or two can keep you from a super bowl. It's like, you simply ignore anything that doesn't fit your agenda!!!!!

    The megadeal QB's are not playing in super bowls. When the QB gets his megadeal, the team then is forced to let go some top players. Those top players are usually the difference between playing in the super bowl and an earlier exit.

    You're screaming that what a team pays a QB doesn't matter w/ absolutely no facts to support it.
     
  20. kskboys

    kskboys Well-Known Member

    18,410 Messages
    20,591 Likes Received
    This is going to be an interesting experiment. Mahomes is the best QB in the NFL. Do they keep on making super bowl appearances once he's paid? Gonna be a good 'un!!!!!
     
    boxer-rumble likes this.

Share This Page