You know, I would come off the "he wouldn't have more chances elsewhere" line too if I were you after that was just debunked above. And when you take away that, where was the Cowboys' huge sacrifice? They chose to hang on to him because they had his rights so they have to accept what came with that without expectation of it ever paying off. As much as you try to make this into a live-action Disney Cinderella movie with Jerry as some prince, this is business. They cut him, they got very little return. They hold on, he's cheap, they control his rights, and maybe they get something out of him in the future. They kept choosing the latter. Other teams would have been thinking the same thing for their business. And since Jerry is all you know, how do you know other "lesser than life" owners don't do the same thing but you don't hear about it because they're not named Jerry Jones? You don't. Your sample size of 1 doesn't make a theory true compared to the other 31 entities, especially when you don't consult those at all. It does make it a narrative though, which is typically advantageous to its creator via bias. So the same way the Cowboys chose to hang on to him for their business, Gregory shouldn't be expected to not fully explore his own business choice to see what he get contractually elsewhere once the season ends or be labeled an ungrateful, greedy, disloyal person if he doesn't sign a cheap deal here, especially if he does well in '21. Because that's exactly what your little narrative creation is being set up to accomplish. Give me what I want to see or you're an immoral person of some sort because I didn't get it. Black and white thinking, living by either/ors or "shoulds," or flat out toddler antics. Take your pick. So your "loyalty" virtue signaling on behalf of Jerry is actually just business risk mitigated by cheap control of a player who may show something eventually. They chose that. Randy has the right to choose too.