Rapoport would not be surprised if Dak gets a shorter deal

[CowboyoWales]

Exactly.............last time it was reported that Dak wanted a 3 yr deal and the Cowboys wanted a 5 yr deal.............they comprised and went with 4 yrs.

Expect something similuar this time, Dak probably wants a 2-3 yr deal so he can get back to the table for another market deal while he is still in his prime. The Cowboys obviously want a 5-6 yr deal just like last time so they will probably compromise again with something in the middle or the last year being a player or team option year.

Posters are going to be shocked when they learn that the holdup has been the lenght of the contract, not the amount. The Cowboys have no concerns at all about paying Dak market, do people really think the Cowboys are going to let Dak walk in free agency and eat $40 million on the cap for a player not on the team? I would say the chance of this happening is about 1%, but maybe that is just me. We shall see soon enough.

No shock that it's length of contract. The way the last contract was restructured it was designed to get Dak to sign that career ending contract (after a Championship performance and the basis of going all the way).

The optic, if Dak want's a 2-3 year (especially if it contains a NTC), is that he's taken the money with no regard to the Cowboys. I dont know how Jerry factors in a low CAP hit 2025 and 26 at the $60m and factor in that $40m outstanding.

Im in on a career ending contract, if he wants anything shorter then 3 years with no NTC, is preferable to a 4 year WITH NTC, IMO.

 

[noshame]

Giving Dak a shorter but higher paying new contract would do nothing but hurt the Cowboys.

Any deal would hurt the Cowboys
Couldn't resist

 

[Chasing6]

A no trade clause is not absolute?

How exactly do you trade a player with a no trade clause unless he waives it?

And why would Dak waive his no trade clause to go to a crap team? Answer is he is not, he will only waive his no trade clause if he is going to a good team and he gets a new market contract.

That sounds pretty dam absolute to me, but maybe I am missing something.

No you are not. Why would Dak want to go to a team with no draft picks?

 

[shabazz]

LOL at “unprecedented leverage”. Only QBs like Brady or Maholmes have that.

When it comes to the QB position, The unprecedented leverage isn't restricted to elite players like Mahomes

The level of qb talent currently in the NFL has never been lower and its simply a case of supply and demand.

When the weak stats of Lawrence and the age and playoff record of Cousins still commands massive money, any above average quarteback currently has unprecedented leverage

 

[Diehardblues]

I’d actually be in favor of a shorter deal. That would allow us time to draft his heir apparent.

 

[Chasing6]

I’d actually be in favor of a shorter deal. That would allow us time to draft his heir apparent.

It wont happen because he will still demand a no trade clause.

 

[Verdict]

Giving Dak a shorter but higher paying new contract would do nothing but hurt the Cowboys.

I am ready to see Dak move on, but if it’s a short deal and the no trade clause is removed Dak might net us something in a trade.

 

[Bullflop]

Both Dak and his agent, Todd France appear to be pretty "dug in" in their quest to be adamant about their demands. Accepting a shorter deal would surely be a compromise from what they most likely want. I imagine it's worth a try, though, if push comes to shove. I suspect Jerry and Stephen are ready to move on from Dak if they can't get the deal they want, though. A trade could even be a likely outcome in a standoff.

 

[Vtwin]

It makes no sense from the team's perspective to sign Dak to a short term contract. They will be in a worse situation in three years then they are now cap-wise. Either commit to him for the next five years at least or let him go.

 

[Chasing6]

Both Dak and his agent, Todd France appear to be pretty "dug in" in their quest to be adamant about their demands. Accepting a shorter deal would surely be a compromise from what they most likely want. I imagine it's worth a try, though, if push comes to shove. I suspect Jerry and Stephen are ready to move on from Dak if they can't get the deal they want, though. A trade could even be a likely outcome in a standoff.

Dak is looking forward to FA.

 

[DakotaReign]

My knee jerk reaction to this is if we pay Dak 160 for 2 years or 180 for 3 years we would not only cripple the team in ‘24 and 25 but also several years after. Considering we already owe 40 some million on the salary cap credit card that has to be paid eventually, and given he would be the highest paid player with 60 APY and a good junk of that would be put on the salary cap credit card, adding to the dept. That’s salary cap suicide.

If that scenario plays out then probably for the first time in my life I would actively root against the Cowboys with Dak under center. That would be really selfish and while he’s playing I would hope for a loss every game he plays in.

Now if he wants 60 million APY but accepted a 6 or 7 year deal to allow us to spread out the salary cap credit card I wouldn’t be thrilled with the extension but it would be doable. But 2 or 3 years?!? No. That would kill us and I would hope for the best in his personal life but on the field that much selfishness would cause me to actively hope he loses and the crowds/fans/media/teammates turn against him.

This has got to be one of the wildest posts I’ve ever seen

 

[Beast_from_East]

No shock that it's length of contract. The way the last contract was restructured it was designed to get Dak to sign that career ending contract (after a Championship performance and the basis of going all the way).

The optic, if Dak want's a 2-3 year (especially if it contains a NTC), is that he's taken the money with no regard to the Cowboys. I dont know how Jerry factors in a low CAP hit 2025 and 26 at the $60m and factor in that $40m outstanding.

Im in on a career ending contract, if he wants anything shorter then 3 years with no NTC, is preferable to a 4 year WITH NTC, IMO.

Good points bro, I agree that something is going to have to give.

If the Cowboys give in on the lenght, then Dak is going to have to give in on the amount....................if he wants $60 a year, then its a 5-6 year deal at the minimum.

Now if Dak is willing to take less than market, say $50 million a year, then a 2-3 yr contract might be doable.

Dak cant get it both ways, he cant get a short term contract AND top of the market rate, he has to give on one or the other in my opinion.

 

[CowboyoWales]

Good points bro, I agree that something is going to have to give.

If the Cowboys give in on the lenght, then Dak is going to have to give in on the amount....................if he wants $60 a year, then its a 5-6 year deal at the minimum.

Now if Dak is willing to take less than market, say $50 million a year, then a 2-3 yr contract might be doable.

Dak cant get it both ways, he cant get a short term contract AND top of the market rate, he has to give on one or the other in my opinion.

Spot on.

 

[Chasing6]

Good points bro, I agree that something is going to have to give.

If the Cowboys give in on the lenght, then Dak is going to have to give in on the amount....................if he wants $60 a year, then its a 5-6 year deal at the minimum.

Now if Dak is willing to take less than market, say $50 million a year, then a 2-3 yr contract might be doable.

Dak cant get it both ways, he cant get a short term contract AND top of the market rate, he has to give on one or the other in my opinion.

Dak we get it every way he wants.

 

[cowboyed]

Length wise Dak's contract could be contractually circumcised if Trey Lance performs very well in pre-season.

 

[Chasing6]

Length wise Dak's contract could be contractually circumcised if Trey Lance performs very well in pre-season.

Trance is trash.