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.
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.
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.
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.
Excellent post.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.
Interesting concept.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.
Yeah, I'd like to see A team try it, just not THIS team.Interesting concept.
I would love to see a team try it and see how it would shake out.
For the teams you mentioned, Vikings had 5m if cap space to start the season off and resigned barr and wr and now have 1m and will be over 400,000 next year. They are the worst situation but can clear cap easily and can be out from cousins after 2020 season.
SF started with 67m, now have 35m after being active in FA and have 23m next year. And any cap they don't use they'll role over. They'll role around 25m giving them 48m of cap space .
Lions started with 33m, now have 27m and have 33m next year. Also can roll over which could give them 43m+ next year.
Raiders started with 72m, now have 29m with being very active in FA and have 58m next year. Roll over could give them 73m+.
Chargers have 12m now and 69m next year. No issues
Pitt started with 16m, signed Ben , ate some of ab cap and still 4m and 19m next year .
Not even getting into the titans since they may not even keep their QB.
Now onto Dallas. We started with 47m, signed Dlaw and some other FA and now have 19m and 84m next year. If we was to sign Dak we would still have 9m this year and 65m+ next year.
You have teams with high paid qbs like the hawks who just singed Russell to the highest contract and they still have 33m and 82m next year. GB started with 34m, was some what active in FA and have 9m now with 16m next year. Atl started with 22m, now have 2m and 28m next year.
Besides Dak and rivers, who haven't signed yet, all the others are top 10 paid QBs. Minn is on the worst shape but can easily get in good shape and it didn't stop them from signing 2 of their own this year. All the others are in good shape or great shape as far as the cap goes.
The cap isn't a issue and sigining qb to a huge contract isn't going to keep a team from signing other players. If someone doesnt want to sign Dak or any player to big contract because they dont think they are worth it or deserve it, that's fine. Just dont use the excuse and narrative that it causes a team not to be able to sign other players. Just not true.
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?
Of course he doesn't. Lol why would he?That's not what Stephen says. lol
We wouldn’t have to tank a season. We could maneuver up in draft. And possibly not all the way to the top .Last year for example there were 5 QB’s taken in 1st round with a couple later in 1st round.If you tank a season, then maybe yes.
But even if you do. We have to be realistic and recognize that like half of first round QB’s end up not being very good. So if you miss on that next QB. You’re now looking at years and years of not
Being a good team.
So there’s a ton of risk involved. It’s not as easy as let’s jusf draft a QB high.
I don’t know which strategy carries more risk. To be honest. Neither is a sure thing.
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".
Good post but if the elite QB's are getting elite money, how much do those team have for the rest of the team? Doesn't that put more players into play in FA?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.
We wouldn’t have to tank a season. We could maneuver up in draft. And possibly not all the way to the top .Last year for example there were 5 QB’s taken in 1st round with a couple later in 1st round.
And the reason most of those 50% Bust is most high draft picks go to lower tier teams. Surely we can agree Daks Rookie success was optimized with a greater supporting cast which was expected to be a playoff contender with Romo .
I didn’t say there wasn’t risk. And I wouldn’t let Dak walk. We finally found a solid backup we can win with.If you do that, you have to give up a lot of draft picks to do so. Which also hamstrings your ability to build a solid team around the QB, just as badly as having less cap space does.
Also, QB’s taken in the middle of the first round bust at an even higher percentage than top 5 QB’s.
Saying the reason most of those QB’s bust is due to the teams they go to, rather than the QB themselves is 1. An opinion. 2. Even if it is true, highlights the fact that you need a team around a QB for them to be successful, which points the risk associated with trading up for a QB.
So again, letting Dak walk and then drafting a QB, anywhere in the first round also comes with high risk for failure. It is certainly not a slam dunk easy thing to do.
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.