CFZ Should Dak Prescott be paid the up and coming contract?

CowboyoWales

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
4,753
No. Fifth-year options are fully guaranteed the second they are picked up.

It's not "just" 4 years - that's advantageous to him because he gets to be a UFA again. Maybe it goes 5 but the only real difference is changing the way the cap hit grows. Maybe Dak wants to take long term, but I really doubt it.
But how do we fit to pay Dak (cash) in those 4 years. If we are going to keep the CAP hit low in 2024 and 2025 (difficult as there's the $60m arrears) then there'll have to be some hefty guaranteed money in 2026 and 2027.
 

Mac_MaloneV1

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,437
Reaction score
5,729
But how do we fit to pay Dak (cash) in those 4 years. If we are going to keep the CAP hit low in 2024 and 2025 (difficult as there's the $60m arrears) then there'll have to be some hefty guaranteed money in 2026 and 2027.
It's just a restructure to convert the remaining ~$60m and you backload the new extension.

I don't know the exact mechanics but it's been done - it's been done with Brees, Rodgers, Roethlisberger I believe.
 

OmerV

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,122
Reaction score
22,616
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
No. Fifth-year options are fully guaranteed the second they are picked up.

It's not "just" 4 years - that's advantageous to him because he gets to be a UFA again. Maybe it goes 5 but the only real difference is changing the way the cap hit grows. Maybe Dak wants to take long term, but I really doubt it.
Obviously a QB would have to step up t certain moments, but those guys did, so I don't see any reason to think it's not possible for Dak.

I think in the absence of a top QB with a top track record, the biggest factor is the overall quality of the team. For example, the Eagles had one of the best defenses in the league when Foles won, and Tampa Bay had the league's best defense when Brad Johnson won.
 
Last edited:

CowboyoWales

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
4,753
Obviously a QB would have to step up, but those guys did, so I don't see any reason to think it's not possible for Dak to do the same.

I think the biggest factor is the overall quality of the team. For example, the Eagles had one of the best defenses in the league when Foles won.
The Eagles had one of the best defenses because they were paying two rookie QBs. Similarly Stafford was on a low CAP hit for the Rams.
 

OmerV

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,122
Reaction score
22,616
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
The Eagles had one of the best defenses because they were paying two rookie QBs. Similarly Stafford was on a low CAP hit for the Rams

The Cowboys look like they should have one of the league's best defenses this year despite what Dak is getting paid, and Stafford wasn't getting a rookie salary when he won in 2021. Obviously it does help a team to have more cap space to work with, but again, the challenge of any team is to build the best team it can.

By the way, Foles wasn't a rookie QB, although he obviously wasn't making big time QB money.
 

CowboyoWales

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,515
Reaction score
4,753
The Cowboys look like they should have one of the league's best defenses this year despite what Dak is getting paid, and Stafford wasn't getting a rookie salary when he won in 2021. Obviously it does help a team to have more cap space to work with, but again, the challenge of any team is to build the best team it can.

By the way, Foles wasn't a rookie QB, although he obviously wasn't making big time QB money.
I never said Stafford was on a rookie deal, but he was on 8% of the CAP. There's a correlation between paying QB's and SB wins, there aren't many that win with a +10% by the way.
We do have a great defense, but Dak has to be able to do his bit.
 

OmerV

Well-Known Member
Messages
26,122
Reaction score
22,616
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
I never said Stafford was on a rookie deal, but he was on 8% of the CAP. There's a correlation between paying QB's and SB wins, there aren't many that win with a +10% by the way.
We do have a great defense, but Dak has to be able to do his bit.
I didn't say you said Stafford was on a rookie deal, but you did say the reason Philly was able to build it's defense was because their QBs were on rookie deals. My point about Stafford is that it is possible for a team to build even if the QB is not on a rookie deal. And, again, the Cowboys appear to have built a top defense even with Dak being paid a lot.

And sure, not many win with a QB making 10% plus, but until recently no team even had that situation. But that's changing. QB salaries have exploded the last 4-5 years, and QB's are taking up more and more cap space. That isn't unique to Dak and the Cowboys. All teams are going to have to deal with that.
 

CCBoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
46,795
Reaction score
22,479
I didn't say you said Stafford was on a rookie deal, but you did say the reason Philly was able to build it's defense was because their QBs were on rookie deals. My point about Stafford is that it is possible for a team to build even if the QB is not on a rookie deal. And, again, the Cowboys appear to have built a top defense even with Dak being paid a lot.

And sure, not many win with a QB making 10% plus, but until recently no team even had that situation. But that's changing. QB salaries have exploded the last 4-5 years, and QB's are taking up more and more cap space. That isn't unique to Dak and the Cowboys. All teams are going to have to deal with that.
Teams are attempting adjust caps to compensate for both game affect and expectancy for career production...obviously. This season running backs are taking a ding for team expectancy for future production at top dollar levels. Some pretty good players are receiving the heat and that part isn't fair. Cap management brings expectation levels higher for younger players when team percentages change. That part demeans the sport unless accepted. The Player's Association won't support that.
 

Tussinman

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,331
Reaction score
3,982
I think his health this season will ultimately determine what happens next.

If he's relatively healthy I don't see him playing this season with Pollard, Cooks, Gallup, and Lamb and it not resulting in him getting an extension.

If he misses a bunch of games or plays mediocre due to him toughing out an injury then that's when I think things get at least a little dicey (in that scenario you really extending 50+ million a year to a player that's had injury issues in 3 out of the last 4 years ?)
 

Swagger

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,306
Reaction score
8,193
I get it, but at the end of the day it comes down to what is actually possible. I suppose swinging for the fence by making play for Rodgers was technically possible but the albatross that is the remainder of Dak's contract isn't going away.

It comes down to, 'it is what it is'. We don't have to like it, but we do have to live with it.
The team is stacked and we are an elite QB away from being Superbowl favourites. Prescott will put up good stats - any competent starting QB would with a strong o-line, All-Pro receiver, quality deep threat, pro bowl running back and top 3 defense etc.

I disagree with the contention that people should shut up if they are of the view Prescott should not receive an extension yet and the front office should see how this season should play out.

The Rams and Chiefs decided they were a QB away from a Superbowl. They both decided to move away from multiple pro bowl Quarterbacks in Alex Smith and Jared Goff to Patrick Mahomes and Matt Stafford respectively resulting in Superbowl rings. They could have played it safe and stuck to the failure in previous post seasons.

Hurts was sitting there in the second round but we didn't take him.

Given that the loss against the 49ers in last season's play offs was Prescott's worst performance in the post season to date with a strong team including a stacked defense, it makes sense to keep all options open at the QB position come the end of the season.

The roster is stacked with an elite defense in a weak conference. Any successful franchise wouldn't simply accept continuous failure given the above.
 

Vtwin

Safety third
Messages
8,665
Reaction score
12,121
The team is stacked and we are an elite QB away from being Superbowl favourites. Prescott will put up good stats - any competent starting QB would with a strong o-line, All-Pro receiver, quality deep threat, pro bowl running back and top 3 defense etc.

I disagree with the contention that people should shut up if they are of the view Prescott should not receive an extension yet and the front office should see how this season should play out.

The Rams and Chiefs decided they were a QB away from a Superbowl. They both decided to move away from multiple pro bowl Quarterbacks in Alex Smith and Jared Goff to Patrick Mahomes and Matt Stafford respectively resulting in Superbowl rings. They could have played it safe and stuck to the failure in previous post seasons.

Hurts was sitting there in the second round but we didn't take him.

Given that the loss against the 49ers in last season's play offs was Prescott's worst performance in the post season to date with a strong team including a stacked defense, it makes sense to keep all options open at the QB position come the end of the season.

The roster is stacked with an elite defense in a weak conference. Any successful franchise wouldn't simply accept continuous failure given the above.
I get it. I really do. I wouldn't have broken the bank on Dak's first contract. That would have been a better time to make the change. Dak was tradeable and the team wasn't quite ready to contend.

In the here and now, that ship has sailed. Dak is not tradeable so any major trade whether to move up in the draft or get a top tier QB was going to involve a ton of draft capital and/or a quality piece of a team ready to contend. Then there is the cost of cutting Dak or paying him to warm the bench.

It's the proverbial 'between the rock and the hard place'.

I could warm up to the idea of making a change right now if there was any good options on the table. I'd trade a SB this season for 3-5 years of cap hell in a heartbeat, but after Rodgers is off the table who else is out there? Anyone I can think of (Carr) is trading one non-difference maker for another.

The Jones bungled this up enough so that Dak almost has to be extended for cap purposes and to keep the short window of opportunity open. It would take a Mahomes (maybe Burrows) caliber QB to come in and hit the ground running in his first year with a new team.

To risky to turn it over to an unknown draft pick, not to mention expensive, and who is out there as either a FA or a trade option?

Three years ago I would have agreed with you 100%. It's a bit more complicated now. I think we're stuck with him for at least 2-3 more years. Potentially longer if the Jones' do something really dumb.

The Chiefs were able to trade Smith for a return and the Rams sold their soul to get Stafford, as well as a couple other pieces to get that SB. I'd be all for that but the no trade clause rules it out.
 

CCBoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
46,795
Reaction score
22,479
Each actual season a team is stuck where they start out as. This season the Cowboys are very strong and need more time reinforcing team interactions. Not throwing things away to please negatively influenced and vocal fans.
 

Vtwin

Safety third
Messages
8,665
Reaction score
12,121
Each actual season a team is stuck where they start out as. This season the Cowboys are very strong and need more time reinforcing team interactions. Not throwing things away to please negatively influenced and vocal fans.
What a coincidence!

I got this same message in a fortune cookie at the all you can eat buffet last week.
 

CCBoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
46,795
Reaction score
22,479
What a coincidence!

I got this same message in a fortune cookie at the all you can eat buffet last week.
WELL, did you take it's advice and invest in the lottery and Powerball? (chuckling to self)

'Three years ago I would have agreed with you 100%. It's a bit more complicated now. I think we're stuck with him for at least 2-3 more years. Potentially longer if the Jones' do something really dumb.' (yours)

Like win?
 

MyFairLady

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,262
Reaction score
7,598
Jerry likes to promote this image of "big time gambler risk taker" but in reality it is the farthest thing from the truth. We are super conservative in how the team is run from the handling of our "star" players to the handling of the salary cap. The only gambling he does is wasting away second round draft picks on human turds like Bossmanfat, the gimp and the moron pot head.
 

CCBoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
46,795
Reaction score
22,479
Jerry likes to promote this image of "big time gambler risk taker" but in reality it is the farthest thing from the truth. We are super conservative in how the team is run from the handling of our "star" players to the handling of the salary cap. The only gambling he does is wasting away second round draft picks on human turds like Bossmanfat, the gimp and the moron pot head.
World class business owners are full of 'stupid' management concepts....Yeeeeeeesssss!

Each season is evaluated, an after-action analysis is conducted. That is all a gamble yet the support and coaches are still pretty good for some reason.
 

CATCH17

1st Round Pick
Messages
67,587
Reaction score
86,014
Dak will not age well as a QB.

He just doesn’t have the arm talent.

He’s always been at his best when he is a true dual threat.
 

Swagger

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,306
Reaction score
8,193
I get it. I really do. I wouldn't have broken the bank on Dak's first contract. That would have been a better time to make the change. Dak was tradeable and the team wasn't quite ready to contend.

In the here and now, that ship has sailed. Dak is not tradeable so any major trade whether to move up in the draft or get a top tier QB was going to involve a ton of draft capital and/or a quality piece of a team ready to contend. Then there is the cost of cutting Dak or paying him to warm the bench.

It's the proverbial 'between the rock and the hard place'.

I could warm up to the idea of making a change right now if there was any good options on the table. I'd trade a SB this season for 3-5 years of cap hell in a heartbeat, but after Rodgers is off the table who else is out there? Anyone I can think of (Carr) is trading one non-difference maker for another.

The Jones bungled this up enough so that Dak almost has to be extended for cap purposes and to keep the short window of opportunity open. It would take a Mahomes (maybe Burrows) caliber QB to come in and hit the ground running in his first year with a new team.

To risky to turn it over to an unknown draft pick, not to mention expensive, and who is out there as either a FA or a trade option?

Three years ago I would have agreed with you 100%. It's a bit more complicated now. I think we're stuck with him for at least 2-3 more years. Potentially longer if the Jones' do something really dumb.

The Chiefs were able to trade Smith for a return and the Rams sold their soul to get Stafford, as well as a couple other pieces to get that SB. I'd be all for that but the no trade clause rules it out.
The team is stacked and if they fail again in the play offs with Prescott at QB then surely it's prudent to at least consider alternatives. That isn't hating etc it's just sensible as the team is stacked in a weak conference and we can't keep squandering these opportunities given the quality of the defense.

It might be a case of drafting a QB in the first round next year and taking the risk.
 

CCBoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
46,795
Reaction score
22,479
I get it. I really do. I wouldn't have broken the bank on Dak's first contract. That would have been a better time to make the change. Dak was tradeable and the team wasn't quite ready to contend.

In the here and now, that ship has sailed. Dak is not tradeable so any major trade whether to move up in the draft or get a top tier QB was going to involve a ton of draft capital and/or a quality piece of a team ready to contend. Then there is the cost of cutting Dak or paying him to warm the bench.

It's the proverbial 'between the rock and the hard place'.

I could warm up to the idea of making a change right now if there was any good options on the table. I'd trade a SB this season for 3-5 years of cap hell in a heartbeat, but after Rodgers is off the table who else is out there? Anyone I can think of (Carr) is trading one non-difference maker for another.

The Jones bungled this up enough so that Dak almost has to be extended for cap purposes and to keep the short window of opportunity open. It would take a Mahomes (maybe Burrows) caliber QB to come in and hit the ground running in his first year with a new team.

To risky to turn it over to an unknown draft pick, not to mention expensive, and who is out there as either a FA or a trade option?

Three years ago I would have agreed with you 100%. It's a bit more complicated now. I think we're stuck with him for at least 2-3 more years. Potentially longer if the Jones' do something really dumb.

The Chiefs were able to trade Smith for a return and the Rams sold their soul to get Stafford, as well as a couple other pieces to get that SB. I'd be all for that but the no trade clause rules it out.
Good discussion...
 
Top