QB contract explosion have potential to disintegrate league parity

[Wood]

First let me say I was never really a fan of league parity. I liked it when Dallas & San Fran were juggernauts who butted heads in championship games. Problem was rest of league wasn't having as much fun and growth was limited to these Super Teams and thus salary cap was instituted.

League parity allows teams to quickly pivot and make astonishing turn-arounds in 1-2 year period. For that reason NFL popularity has exploded since hard Salary Cap was implemented. That system worked as long as GMs created flexibility by only paying elite players elite money, signing starters to reasonable contracts and churning bottom third of roster on yearly basis.

However, that stable time period appears to be coming to end. What is happening now is middling QBs (non elite players) are commanding elite money within a limited hard salary cap structure. Meaning teams signing these middling QBs to monster contracts will lose the ability to retain core pieces at expense of retaining these middle of pack QBs. In other words, the opportunity cost of signing these non elite players to elite contracts will increase dramatically.

How I see NFL shaping up is few teams maybe 5 or so who will truly have elite QBs who will challenge for SB (like they always do). The middle of pack teams (paying monster QB contracts) can't out-depth the top teams any longer. And the bad teams will keep drafting QB early but will require time for them to develop.

Teams I see potentially in trouble are: Vikings (Cousins), 49ers (Garoppolo), Cowboys (Prescott), Lions (Stafford) and Raiders (Carr) and possibly Pitts (Big Ben). Following teams will soon be in trouble with this predicament: Chargers (Rivers) and Titans (Mariota).

The only silver lining for Dallas (if Dak gets $30 million year) is that he makes quantum leap as QB then contract is fine. If he doesn't, Cowboy will be consistently be bubble playoff team who gets bounced early in playoffs because they won't have depth of roster to off-set a more highly skilled team at QB.

 

[northerncowboynation]

First let me say I was never really a fan of league parity. I liked it when Dallas & San Fran were juggernauts who butted heads in championship games. Problem was rest of league wasn't having as much fun and growth was limited to these Super Teams and thus salary cap was instituted.

League parity allows teams to quickly pivot and make astonishing turn-arounds in 1-2 year period. For that reason NFL popularity has exploded since hard Salary Cap was implemented. That system worked as long as GMs created flexibility by only paying elite players elite money, signing starters to reasonable contracts and churning bottom third of roster on yearly basis.

However, that stable time period appears to be coming to end. What is happening now is middling QBs (non elite players) are commanding elite money within a limited hard salary cap structure. Meaning teams signing these middling QBs to monster contracts will lose the ability to retain core pieces at expense of retaining these middle of pack QBs. In other words, the opportunity cost of signing these non elite players to elite contracts will increase dramatically.

How I see NFL shaping up is few teams maybe 5 or so who will truly have elite QBs who will challenge for SB (like they always do). The middle of pack teams (paying monster QB contracts) can't out-depth the top teams any longer. And the bad teams will keep drafting QB early but will require time for them to develop.

Teams I see potentially in trouble are: Vikings (Cousins), 49ers (Garoppolo), Cowboys (Prescott), Lions (Stafford) and Raiders (Carr) and possibly Pitts (Big Ben). Following teams will soon be in trouble with this predicament: Chargers (Rivers) and Titans (Mariota).

The only silver lining for Dallas (if Dak gets $30 million year) is that he makes quantum leap as QB then contract is fine. If he doesn't, Cowboy will be consistently be bubble playoff team who gets bounced early in playoffs because they won't have depth of roster to off-set a more highly skilled team at QB.

There are 5-6 elite teams now. I don't see QB contracts changing it. I do think we'll see a changing of the guard in the elite teams. Gone will be NE, the Packers, Steelers, Seahawks, Saints and Falcons. Most with a foot out of the door now. What is their hope, a new QB of course to replace the aging. Like we found in Dak sorta, ya know

 

[GenoT]

Will become a Dak-centric thread in 3...2...1...

 

[conner01]

It will really effect teams who don’t draft well
You can keep replacing the other 52 but you better draft well
Luckily we tend to draft well

 

[Corso]

Mahomes gon' break the camel's back.

 

[Insomniac]

Since I started watching the NFL the league has always claimed to have parity. I thought it was Pete Rozelle that came up with "any given Sunday" no later than 1970. How are you measuring parity? Is it by how many games the best teams win? Point differential, how many different teams win SBs, reach SBs, something else?

Also, while QB salaries are going up in nominal terms are they actually going up as a % of the cap? I actually think they should be but I don't know if they are. This year the QB franchise tag is is $24.8 mil, the 2nd highest tag is for DE at $17.1 mil. There's no way those values are right if you're basing the value of a player on how much impact he has on winning and losing. The structure of the game just make the QB far more important than any other position. This was always true but the rule change and emphasis on certain rules hasmade the QB even more important.

The teams with the best QBs always had a big advantage (not necessarily a decisive advantage) and it's more true now than it was 20-50 years ago. (yeah I'm old) Personally I liked the style of football from the 1980s because you could win with different styles. The Commanders won 3 SBs with a smashmouth run game, strong D, ok to good QBs. SF won with Jo Montana and the West Coast offense, the Giants won with LT a great D and a good balanced offense. The winning style has become more and more QB centric. That's why I see KC over the next decade as the most likely dominant team. (as long as they can add some good players that can avoid being thrown out of the league for beating up women and children) Perhaps theother teams will look at Mahomes film and come up with plans to force him to his weaknesses. OTOH they may look at the film and determine, "this guy is just bleeping good".

 

[Red Dragon]

I agree, the Cowboys are in deep danger of overpaying Dak. Doing so will cost the team dearly talent-wise elsewhere.

 

[lkelly]

Teams like the Chiefs, with Mahomes under contract for 3 more years (potentially, with the 5th year option), playing at an elite level for peanuts compared to the Prescotts of the world, will have a huge advantage. The "Russell Wilson advantage" that teams like the Seahawks had (and Dallas) will be even more pronounced. Peanuts vs. $15-$20 million is one thing. Peanuts vs. $35 million is a much wider disparity.

Unless of course you are the evil empire, with the GOAT playing at a low end starter salary. That's an advantage that's hard to overcome.

If we have a few more years of the top paid QBs missing the playoffs, GMs are going to really have to adjust. Teams might be more willing to deal a viable starter and roll the dice on a youngster if it means a huge potential edge if they hit on the right guy.

 

[CowboyRoy]

First let me say I was never really a fan of league parity. I liked it when Dallas & San Fran were juggernauts who butted heads in championship games. Problem was rest of league wasn't having as much fun and growth was limited to these Super Teams and thus salary cap was instituted.

League parity allows teams to quickly pivot and make astonishing turn-arounds in 1-2 year period. For that reason NFL popularity has exploded since hard Salary Cap was implemented. That system worked as long as GMs created flexibility by only paying elite players elite money, signing starters to reasonable contracts and churning bottom third of roster on yearly basis.

However, that stable time period appears to be coming to end. What is happening now is middling QBs (non elite players) are commanding elite money within a limited hard salary cap structure. Meaning teams signing these middling QBs to monster contracts will lose the ability to retain core pieces at expense of retaining these middle of pack QBs. In other words, the opportunity cost of signing these non elite players to elite contracts will increase dramatically.

How I see NFL shaping up is few teams maybe 5 or so who will truly have elite QBs who will challenge for SB (like they always do). The middle of pack teams (paying monster QB contracts) can't out-depth the top teams any longer. And the bad teams will keep drafting QB early but will require time for them to develop.

Teams I see potentially in trouble are: Vikings (Cousins), 49ers (Garoppolo), Cowboys (Prescott), Lions (Stafford) and Raiders (Carr) and possibly Pitts (Big Ben). Following teams will soon be in trouble with this predicament: Chargers (Rivers) and Titans (Mariota).

The only silver lining for Dallas (if Dak gets $30 million year) is that he makes quantum leap as QB then contract is fine. If he doesn't, Cowboy will be consistently be bubble playoff team who gets bounced early in playoffs because they won't have depth of roster to off-set a more highly skilled team at QB.

So the teams with no franchise QB, lost in an endless QB search will now rise to the top?

Total and complete nonsense.

 

[HungryLion]

I don’t really agree. Simply because the % or cap space QB’s are getting isn’t drastically increasing. The total number of dollars is increasing, but that is also as the cap increases.

It’s not so much the bottom line figure. It’s % of the cap that QB’s are getting.

Having a high priced QB does reduce flexibility with paying the rest of your roster. But that is also a much smaller problem to have, then not having a good QB. Poor QB play is much more restrictive to having team success, than some cap limitations. IMO.

 

[unionjack8]

This is why you should draft a qb in the top 3 rounds every year.....
Paying qb on rookie contracts should help you, if you get the right qb and coach...

 

[Mr_437]

Great write-up@Wood!
80s football was good, Insomniac, and they changed the rules protecting the QB and WRs to help usher in this new brand of football...catering to offense n points. Naturally, this means QBs n WRs are gonna start getting bigger contracts.

Anyway, I'm waiting to see which GM has the sac to trade his good QB, and use those resources to build a complete team that can win with an average QB. Example: Stephen Jones won't get fired so he's good there. DAL has a nearly complete team with several contracts coming up for good young, core players. If DAL decided to buck the trend use that $30M to construct an elite defense, stout OL n potent weapons for the next 4 years... Fielding an average QB or role the dice on a 1st or 2nd round QB to get that low pay scale where would they be?

Or you could insert Philly, LAR, TB, TEN, LAC, CIN...I could keep going but you get the point, so it's not about Dak but the QB landscape and finding a different way to win.

 

[Cattle_Rancher]

If one of you cap guys has the time to look up QBs from the 90s 00s and now what the top QBs salaries were and what percentage of the cap they ate I’d be really interested in seeing how if any has the percentage changed since the 90s to now.

 

[HungryLion]

Great write-up@Wood!
80s football was good, Insomniac, and they changed the rules protecting the QB and WRs to help usher in this new brand of football...catering to offense n points. Naturally, this means QBs n WRs are gonna start getting bigger contracts.

Anyway, I'm waiting to see which GM has the sac to trade his good QB, and use those resources to build a complete team that can win with an average QB. Example: Stephen Jones won't get fired so he's good there. DAL has a nearly complete team with several contracts coming up for good young, core players. If DAL decided to buck the trend use that $30M to construct an elite defense, stout OL n potent weapons for the next 4 years... Fielding an average QB or role the dice on a 1st or 2nd round QB to get that low pay scale where would they be?

Or you could insert Philly, LAR, TB, TEN, LAC, CIN...I could keep going but you get the point, so it's not about Dak but the QB landscape and finding a different way to win.

I suppose another question that could be asked is,

If you aren’t going to pay your QB and want to win a championship with a low level QB. Even with the cap space, how easy is it to build a team stacked enough to win with poor QB play?

Meaning, even with cap space. I think it’s still hard to build a defense on the level of the 2000 Ravens, the Bucs, etc

 

[Cowboysheelsreds053]

Will become a Dak-centric thread in 3...2...1...

LLLOOOLLL

 

[Diehardblues]

The obvious solution is to treat the QB position like other positions.

If it’s not Elite talent , pay it accordingly or look to replace in the draft.

If Dak is not our most talented player , he shouldn’t be paid as such.

 

[Diehardblues]

I suppose another question that could be asked is,

If you aren’t going to pay your QB and want to win a championship with a low level QB. Even with the cap space, how easy is it to build a team stacked enough to win with poor QB play?

Meaning, even with cap space. I think it’s still hard to build a defense on the level of the 2000 Ravens, the Bucs, etc

Right and why Id continue swinging for the fences until I hit on a QB.

If Dak isn’t our most talented player and or most critical component then he shouldn’t be paid as such.

Don't we think we could draft in one of these years a more Elite QB?

 

[pansophy]

I don’t really agree. Simply because the % or cap space QB’s are getting isn’t drastically increasing. The total number of dollars is increasing, but that is also as the cap increases.

It’s not so much the bottom line figure. It’s % of the cap that QB’s are getting.

Having a high priced QB does reduce flexibility with paying the rest of your roster. But that is also a much smaller problem to have, then not having a good QB. Poor QB play is much more restrictive to having team success, than some cap limitations. IMO.

Having someone of elite quality at a mid-tier pay scale is a huge advantage. I have to wonder if the Mannings made more money in advertisements than football. Winning can make someone a lot of money.

Not sure if it should be expected for QBs to take less, but one could argue it is in their long term best interests and could be an investment if they can secure advertising deals.

 

[DallasDomination]

They'll raise the cap over and over again. The QBs will just get more money and we'll still have this problem.

 

[AbeBeta]

Another Dak thread.

-zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz