Question re: Dak and greed

[OmerV]

But we won’t be extending Dak.

That's not the point. 4 years is 4 years whether it is an extension or a new contract. You said you didn't recall anyone getting a $100 million + guarantee for anything less than a 5 year deal, and the point was that the $100+million guarantee Wentz, Goff and Wilson got was for 4 years.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Correct, I should’ve said Dal didn’t offer him a market value deal. I think Dal intentionally lowballed him since they may not have been 100% sold. Then Dak gets off to a hot start and now the leverage swings to Dak and he wants more.

Rumored to be 27 AAV at the time. I don't think that was a lowball offer in 2017/18. Discussions on an extension were going on for some time with the team and Dak. The narrative that the team was somehow unfair or short sighted is a creation of the media and Dak's representation, IMO. Nothing could be further from the truth IMO.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

That's not the point. 4 years is 4 years whether it is an extension or a new contract. You said you didn't recall anyone getting a $100 million + guarantee for anything less than 5 years, and the point was that the $100+million guarantee Wentz, Goff and Wilson got was for 4 years,

Was not for 4 years though. The money could be spread out over the years still left on the contract as well so it was actually 6 years, I believe. It was never 4 years, in terms of how you could manipulate the numbers and that's the real issue.

So actually, it kinda is the point.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yes I agree with that.

Unfortunately the NFL has a salary cap and it puts fans cheering for owners to win deals and not players.

I hope Dak gets as little as possible because my team will be better for it.

I'm a Cowboy fan. Not a Prescott fan.

This is exactly right. Players are gonna move on for the money. That's just how it works. Why would I ever cheer for the player over the team? The team will be there in 5 years. The player might be playing for Philly or the Skins or NY in 5 years.

 

[OmerV]

Was not for 4 years though. The money could be spread out over the years still left on the contract as well so it was actually 6 years, I believe. It was never 4 years, in terms of how you could manipulate the numbers and that's the real issue.

So actually, it kinda is the point.

The signing bonus was paid up front, but that doesn't change the fact that what they were paying for was 4 more years, and that 2019 and 2020 are part of the old contract. They didn't have to pay a dime to have Wentz under contract in 2019-2020, so what they paid for was an additional 4 years.

 

[ondaedg]

I know I know, I just couldn’t help myself despite the numerous Dak threads.

This really isn’t a question of what you think he should be paid, or what he deserves, more do you honestly think it’s just “greed” considering the (league relative) peanuts he played for for 4 years?

No matter what your opinion on him as a player or as your teams QB, there is NO argument that he massively outplayed his draft position and associated contract. Stepping in from day one as the starter and on through the present, he’s made roughly what we’re giving Dalton to the be the backup for a year. And he did it without a peep. There was never any holdout talk, any salary talk, any hint of bitterness or entitlement, just did his job and fulfilled the contract in full and without any drama around it.

With that said, I (personally don’t begrudge him for pushing for whatever he wants, because that’s the mechanics of the league in the same fashion the contract he previously received and honored. I’m just not seeing the greed.

Personal biases affect people's ability to utilize good judgment and the anti-Dak bias has brought out some of the craziest stuff I have ever read in a Cowboys forum.

I honestly can't tell if they are knowingly making this stuff up or they just lose their ability to reason and use sound logic with regards to Dak. This forum is getting like Facebook in Oct 2016.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The signing bonus was paid up front, but that doesn't change the fact that what they were paying for was 4 more years, and that 2019 and 2020 are part of the old contract. They didn't have to pay a dime to have Wentz under contract in 2019-2020, so what they paid for was an additional 4 years.

Yeah, it does. You have to be able to balance the cap and an extension allows fexability. A new contract for limited years doesn't. It makes a lot of difference. This is not about the money, it's about being able to spread it over enough years IMO and clearly, 4 is not enough.

 

[The Fonz]

For Dak it is about money.... he wants to maximize how much he can get ......it is his only chance in life so i don't blame him for doing so...Romo did it Dez did it Zeke did it so why not him
Something wrong when entertainers are getting paid more than real heroes

 

[CATCH17]

How an you be a Cowboys fan when you say things like Dak sucks, or Dak is a backup?

Or you want to go with Dalton? Teams gets worse with all those scenarios and wallos in QB hell.

If you want to win, then you pay Dak until you find a better option. Its that simple.

Dak is horrible value..

I hope Washington gives him the contract he wants.

 

[OmerV]

Yeah, it does. You have to be able to balance the cap and an extension allows fexability. A new contract for limited years doesn't. It makes a lot of difference. This is not about the money, it's about being able to spread it over enough years IMO and clearly, 4 is not enough.

You are talking about the mechanics of the salary cap, not what the team was paying Wentz for. The signing bonus wasn't to get him to sign a 6 year contract (and he didn't sign a 6 year contract), it was to get him to sign a 4 year extension, and the fact the NFL allows an up front signing bonus to be spread out for cap purposes doesn't change that.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

You are talking about the mechanics of the salary cap, not what the team was paying Wentz for. The signing bonus wasn't to get him to sign a 6 year contract, it was to get him to sign a 4 year extension, and the fact the NFL allows an up front signing bonus to be spread out for cap purposes doesn't change that.

Yes, I am, because that is what matters in this discussion. See, the money doesn't matter really. I believe that if the right amount of years were there, Jerry would commit to 40 or 50 or what have you but they aren't and Jerry has to make the cap work. I said this two years ago, we don't know what the cap will be, going forward. You can't just assume that the money will be there. This situation with the Virus is a perfect example. We may not have a season or at least, a full season. The TV money will most certainly be impacted by this. Who knows how? You can't just assume that things will go by the numbers because there are no guarantees. I said this two years ago and I have seen nothing to suggest that it is wrong.

The idea that it doesn't make a difference when spreading up front cap is just wrong headed. I respect your opinions Omer but you are wrong here. Lets say you have 106 Mil Guaranteed up front. If you can't spread that out, all of it hits in a single cap year. What team can afford that type of hit? Of course it matters and it does change things. I'm sorry, that's the truth. 6 years matters big time and as I said, this isn't a discussion around the actual money. It's about manipulating the cap. If you can't do that, then no big money deals are happening for any QB. Of course it matters. It's critical.

 

[InTheZone]

Better with Dalton? Yah, you are no QB guru, that is for sure.

And if Dak isn't good enough then its laughable for you to say Dalton is.

And if Dalton is REALLY as good as Dak then what is your plan if not to tank and draft a QB top 5?

Every week its a new dumb idea that makes no sense.

No one here is a guru, don't need reminders that we're not paid for our input lol. And is it not fair to say Dalton could be better with this team?

 

[OmerV]

Yes, I am, because that is what matters in this discussion. See, the money doesn't matter really. I believe that if the right amount of years were there, Jerry would commit to 40 or 50 or what have you but they aren't and Jerry has to make the cap work. I said this two years ago, we don't know what the cap will be, going forward. You can't just assume that the money will be there. This situation with the Virus is a perfect example. We may not have a season or at least, a full season. The TV money will most certainly be impacted by this. Who knows how? You can't just assume that things will go by the numbers because there are no guarantees. I said this two years ago and I have seen nothing to suggest that it is wrong.

The idea that it doesn't make a difference when spreading up front cap is just wrong headed. I respect your opinions Omer but you are wrong here. Lets say you have 106 Mil Guaranteed up front. If you can't spread that out, all of it hits in a single cap year. What team can afford that type of hit? Of course it matters and it does change things. I'm sorry, that's the truth. 6 years matters big time and as I said, this isn't a discussion around the actual money. It's about manipulating the cap. If you can't do that, then no big money deals are happening for any QB. Of course it matters. It's critical.

You aren't paying attention. I did not say it doesn't help the team to spread the cap hit. What I said was the $100 million guarantee was for the 4 year extension, and how the cap hit is spread out doesn't change that. In short, the team didn't pay for 6 years, that's just how they are able to spread it out for cap reasons.

Remember, the discussion was about what the $100 guarantee was for - which was the 4 year extension - not how the cap hit is spread. The player and his agent agreed to extend for 4 years in exchange for the guaranteed money, not 6 years..

 

[Proof]

That by no means is the question up on the table at present...ability, not long term advantage in the cap. Having Dalton affects leverage, and even the agent for Dak Prescott has to acknowledge that. Even if he remains dumb and percentage dedicated for his own money.

huh? How are you going to tell me what the question is, when I’m asking it. I’m asking him if HE is saying he’d be fine with moving on from Dak due to having Dalton, what’s the next move from there

 

[AbeBeta]

Anybody telling anybody else to shut needs to shut up. See how that works?

Typical. Never on the side of the worker.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

You aren't paying attention. I did not say it doesn't help the team to spread the cap hit. What I said was the $100 million guarantee was for the 4 year extension, and how the cap hit is spread out doesn't change that. In short, the team didn't pay for 6 years, that's just how they are able to spread it out for cap reasons.

No I am paying attention. What I'm saying is that your original point, is not important, nor is it material to the actual issue. I told you in the first post, the money is not the actual issue. It is you who are not paying attention Omer. The money doesn't matter. Let me say it again, The Money Doesn't Matter.

It seems to me that their are really two different discussion around this contract. One is definitely about the money but who cares? If the cap works and the money is managed, I don't give a crap about the money. I care about the team being able to manage the cap and continue to be able to bring in talent. If the cap isn't managed, that is seriously compromised. It means that you are going to be forced into restructuring and basically pushing cap hits into the future, which ultimately creates cap issues that last much longer then the actual life of the player on the team. That's what you see Washington doing all the time. Is that who we want to be as an organization? I don't.

So you can complain about the money, which makes no difference or you can complain about the cap management, which makes all the difference in the world. Jerry has never shied away from paying QBs. That's never, ever happened so this is about being able to manage the cap IMO. The money is what it is. This is why I just shake my head at all of these people who scream "Pay The Man!" or claim that all posters who are not for this madness are simply against seeing Dak get paid or whatever other ridiculous BS they concoct. All of those people are ignoring what's right in front of them and they are as bad, or worse even, then the ones complaining about money. I've said many times that I don't think any of these QBs are worth the money they are getting paid and that's absolutely an honest statement. But I don't really care about the actual money, except in terms of how it effects the cap.

I wouldn't want anybody to tell me how much I get paid for the job I do if I'm making the company money but on the other hand, I'm not going to pay myself so much money that I ruin the company either. To all things balance. That's what's important.

 

[kskboys]

Personal biases affect people's ability to utilize good judgment and the anti-Dak bias has brought out some of the craziest stuff I have ever read in a Cowboys forum.

I honestly can't tell if they are knowingly making this stuff up or they just lose their ability to reason and use sound logic with regards to Dak. This forum is getting like Facebook in Oct 2016.

It has, but on both sides of the coin.

 

[kskboys]

For Dak it is about money.... he wants to maximize how much he can get ......it is his only chance in life so i don't blame him for doing so...Romo did it Dez did it Zeke did it so why not him
Something wrong when entertainers are getting paid more than real heroes

Only if you don't like living in a free country.

 

[kskboys]

Typical. Never on the side of the worker.

This isn't a discussion about workers vs business owners. Maybe that's why so many people have strange views.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Typical. Never on the side of the worker.

No, never on the side of you. So what does that say about you? If I'm never on the side of the Worker, in your mind, and I say specifically that I'm not on your side, then that means you are always pro worker regardless. There is a name for that.

Nobody is 100% right. Being always on the side of anything is a mistake. If you, or anybody, think less of me for it, big deal. I don't lose any sleep over it and I'm actually happy to be markedly different in that regard. No one side is always right, not me, certainly not you, nobody.

Telling anybody to shut up on a public forum is absurd. It literally goes against the purpose of the board. Yeah, not losing any sleep.