Spotrac's projected QB extensions based on calculated market value; What is Dak's?

[Buzzbait]

It's the owners that are thirsty for qb play and paying out the high cap percentages for a qb...not the player.

It's the owner afraid of letting a guy walk. Not the qbs fault he knows another team will pay him.

Stop blaming the player.

I'm not "blaming the player", I'm blaming a system that's not what it claims to be. First of all it is not a free market by any stretch of the imagination. In effect, it's a free market for QBs ONLY! The rest of the team is subject to a stupid Cap system that affects the whole team except the QB! The QB can hold out in Cabo till the owner gives in and pays the price demanded by the QB and his agent.
In order to meet that price no matter how high it is, the team just enlarges the QB's piece of the pie which shrinks the remaining share of the pie for everyone else.
How can anyone say that's a description of a free market??? It's not!
In effect it's a free market for QBs only! And that freedom comes at the expense of the rest of the team!

BTW, you said "stop blaming the player", but you can't say the player has nothing to do with it when they hold out for multiple millions of dollars, knowing that will shrink the size of the pie for the rest of the team.
If you want a free market then you dump the Salary Cap all together, and a system that perpetually increases the QB's percentage of the pie at the expense of the rest of the team.

 

[KingCorcoran]

I'm not "blaming the player", I'm blaming a system that's not what it claims to be. First of all it is not a free market by any stretch of the imagination. In effect, it's a free market for QBs ONLY! The rest of the team is subject to a stupid Cap system that affects the whole team except the QB! The QB can hold out in Cabo till the owner gives in and pays the price demanded by the QB and his agent.
In order to meet that price no matter how high it is, the team just enlarges the QB's piece of the pie which shrinks the remaining share of the pie for everyone else.
How can anyone say that's a description of a free market??? It's not!
In effect it's a free market for QBs only! And that freedom comes at the expense of the rest of the team!

BTW, you said "stop blaming the player", but you can't say the player has nothing to do with it when they hold out for multiple millions of dollars, knowing that will shrink the size of the pie for the rest of the team.
If you want a free market then you dump the Salary Cap all together, and a system that perpetually increases the QB's percentage of the pie at the expense of the rest of the team.

The salary cap mandates were agreed to by the players. But you are correct about it not being a “free market” system. There is a minimum a player must be paid. That’s not free market. Amateur players drafted by NFL teams may only sign with the team that drafted them, and their compensation is already set. That is not free market. And no player can make more in the NFL than what one of the 32 ownership groups is willing to pay. And the players also agreed to the penalties that may be assessed to players holding out while under contract. If a player is a free agent, of course he can choose not to sign without penalty, because he is not under contract. That cannot be considered a hold out. Collective Bargaining Agreements are the opposite of “free market”. The players could decertify their union and deal with the owners in purely a “free market” scenario. You tell me. Do you think they would consider that? Being a fan is strictly voluntary. Why don’t you leave the business of the NFL to those whose livelihoods depend on it. It is really none of your business. Just cheer for your favorite team and buy a logo key chain every once in a while.

 

[TwentyOne]

That's true, but back then quarterbacks were the main position taking a chunk out of the salary cap.

Now though, non-QB positions are getting a larger percentage of the salary cap than they did back then so that either has to be offset through lowering the quarterback salary cap hit or by severely limiting the rest of the player pool by replacing veterans with rookie-contract players as much as possible.

For example, right now the salary cap in 2024 is set to be around $255 million. At 15%, the means the quarterback should be averaging $38.25 million per year.

Instead though, projections are showing around $50 million which is close to 20% and is too high when you have to pay star players in non-QB positions $25+ million unless you want to field a mostly recently-out-of-college rest of the team.

As I said in an earlier post though, I am okay with 15% or even a little higher if the quarterback 1) makes players around him much better, and 2) has proven he can win Super Bowls for you (ex: Mahomes).

All four of those you listed above won Super Bowls, three of which I believe won before they got those contracts. Peyton Manning was one of the rare exceptions but he ultimately won two Super Bowls.

To be clear, my comments are not really about Dak but rather all quarterbacks not named Mahomes at this point.

Yes, 15 or even 20% would be ok with me too. But then it had to be a real franchise qb. I know there are some qbs occupiing 25%+ of the cap(burrow for example). I would even pay that kind of money, but then it has to be a qb that showed you with no doubt that he is elite. That because you then dont need to invest so much in other positions.

I cant find any history of other positions. Do you have some url to back up your statement? I did find some actual numbers of course.

Staying out of the prescott talk is a very diplomatic and snart choice. I would do the same as the head of a board.

 

[Chasing6]

Yes, 15 or even 20% would be ok with me too. But then it had to be a real franchise qb. I know there are some qbs occupiing 25%+ of the cap(burrow for example). I would even pay that kind of money, but then it has to be a qb that showed you with no doubt that he is elite. That because you then dont need to invest so much in other positions.

I cant find any history of other positions. Do you have some url to back up your statement? I did find some actual numbers of course.

Staying out of the prescott talk is a very diplomatic and snart choice. I would do the same as the head of a board.

Joe Burrow is not taking 25% of their cap, he is below 20%.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/player/...9 Rookie,average annual salary of $55,000,000.

 

[TwentyOne]

1. I don’t want a cap mandated by the league, it’s a crutch for poor front offices. Teams can certainly negotiate contracts that way if they choose to.
2. When a QB signs a contract for top of the market, in year 3-4 they are typically no longer top of the market due to other contracts surpassing theirs. If a team tied a salary to % of the cap that saving wouldn't occur at near the same level because the QB would be getting a raise with each cap increase.

Your opinion is ok. But you have a lot of prejustice and no arguments to show.

Unregulated markets are always the death for competition (see us market for example). Only the rich are getting richer off of those circumstances. that cant be compensated by good Management. That doesnt mean that our fo isnt the real problem.

And btw the cap by itself is already a Regulation that is mandated by the league.

 

[Chasing6]

Your opinion is ok. But you have a lot of prejustice and no arguments to show.

Unregulated markets are always the death for competition (see us market for example). Only the rich are getting richer off of those circumstances. that cant be compensated by good Management. That doesnt mean that our fo isnt the real problem.

And btw the cap by itself is already a Regulation that is mandated by the league.

Most GM's have imposed a cap break down for their team. Example 48% offense, 48% defense, 2% Special Teams, 2% Cap Space.

From there they break it down further by position groups.

What you are basically asking for is the league to put something place to protect GM Jethro from his incompetence.

 

[TwentyOne]

Most GM's have imposed a cap break down for their team. Example 48% offense, 48% defense, 2% Special Teams, 2% Cap Space.

From there they break it down further by position groups.

What you are basically asking for is the league to put something place to protect GM Jethro from his incompetence.

I am interessted: what is it that i am exactly asking for?

Again prejustice...

 

[TwentyOne]

Joe Burrow is not taking 25% of their cap, he is below 20%.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/player/_/id/47594/joe-burrow#:~:text=2023-2029 Rookie,average annual salary of $55,000,000.

Below 20%. How to you get there?

Anyways its wrong.

He occupies exactly 24.5%

https://overthecap.com/contract-history/quarterback

 

[Chasing6]

I am interessted: what is it that i am exactly asking for?

Again prejustice...

Winning football games starts with the FO decisions. We are at a disadvantage from day 1. If their was a GM Ranking we would be lucky to be in the top 20.

 

[Reality]

Yes, 15 or even 20% would be ok with me too. But then it had to be a real franchise qb. I know there are some qbs occupiing 25%+ of the cap(burrow for example). I would even pay that kind of money, but then it has to be a qb that showed you with no doubt that he is elite. That because you then dont need to invest so much in other positions.

I cant find any history of other positions. Do you have some url to back up your statement? I did find some actual numbers of course.

Staying out of the prescott talk is a very diplomatic and snart choice. I would do the same as the head of a board.

Not sure what I need to "back up" as I stated my opinion which is based on what I have seen and read the last few years.

As for the "Prescott" talk, I have no problem sharing my thoughts on him or any player, but my comments and opinions were about most quarterbacks, which I have been consistent about throughout every post I have made in this thread.

My big issue with high salary cap impacting contracts is that you are gambling that the player will live up to the expectations while also hoping that in the violent game of football they somehow avoid injury despite playing a lot each game.

At the same time, when you give out 10% or higher salary cap impacting contracts, you are going to have to cut corners in other positions while also hoping none of the remaining key players you have get hurt because you have less depth.

 

[Chasing6]

Not sure what I need to "back up" as I stated my opinion which is based on what I have seen and read the last few years.

As for the "Prescott" talk, I have no problem sharing my thoughts on him or any player, but my comments and opinions were about most quarterbacks, which I have been consistent about throughout every post I have made in this thread.

My big issue with high salary cap impacting contracts is that you are gambling that the player will live up to the expectations while also hoping that in the violent game of football they somehow avoid injury despite playing a lot each game.

At the same time, when you give out 10% or higher salary cap impacting contracts, you are going to have to cut corners in other positions while also hoping none of the remaining key players you have get hurt because you have less depth.

First of all player contracts and player salary caps are 2 completely different things.

The contract Dak signed 4 years for $160M or $40M a year should have been paid for in full this year.

GM Jethro asked Dak to restructure his contract to free up money to sign or extend other players. That is not Dak's fault that his salary cap this year is $55M and that we owe him $40M next year.

That is 100% GM Jethro's fault. Fans need to understand how the cap works.

 

[KingCorcoran]

Not sure what I need to "back up" as I stated my opinion which is based on what I have seen and read the last few years.

As for the "Prescott" talk, I have no problem sharing my thoughts on him or any player, but my comments and opinions were about most quarterbacks, which I have been consistent about throughout every post I have made in this thread.

My big issue with high salary cap impacting contracts is that you are gambling that the player will live up to the expectations while also hoping that in the violent game of football they somehow avoid injury despite playing a lot each game.

At the same time, when you give out 10% or higher salary cap impacting contracts, you are going to have to cut corners in other positions while also hoping none of the remaining key players you have get hurt because you have less depth.

Isn’t the player gambling, too? He’s taking a chance on being able to perform although he has zero control over who his teammates will be. He’s gambling that he won’t get injured and not be able to perform up to his talent although he does not control what play is called. If the team wants that kind of control over players they’re going to have to pay a lot for the best players. That’s the trade off. If Jerry Jones doesn’t want a player he can cut them and sign someone else. Otherwise he is going to have to pay for top talent just like the other 31 teams. All players know if they want to negotiate the salary cap away (ceiling) the owners will counter with no minimum pay scale (floor). Since a vast majority of players are paid the floor, and each member of the NFLPA has one vote, the cap stays and so does the minimum pay.

 

[Chasing6]

Isn’t the player gambling, too? He’s taking a chance on being able to perform although he has zero control over who his teammates will be. He’s gambling that he won’t get injured and not be able to perform up to his talent although he does not control what play is called. If the team wants that kind of control over players they’re going to have to pay a lot for the best players. That’s the trade off. If Jerry Jones doesn’t want a player he can cut them and sign someone else. Otherwise he is going to have to pay for top talent just like the other 31 teams. All players know if they want to negotiate the salary cap away (ceiling) the owners will counter with no minimum pay scale (floor). Since a vast majority of players are paid the floor, and each member of the NFLPA has one vote, the cap stays and so does the minimum pay.

He is gambling his GM is not an idiot.

 

[Jarv]

I'm just saying, paying 3-5 players exorbitant amount of money while unable to pat more for a better playoff capable team has not work for the Cowboys to even come close to sniffing a Super Bowl for almost 30 years now.

We should be trading players, keeping some to resign.

I have 4 players I would consider trading.

Dak, but has a no trade clause

CD, at the park of his value

Parsons, peak of value

Martin, before he loses his value.

Not saying that I would trade all of them, but those are the top of my list.

We're terrible at cap management because we don't trade "our guys" why they still have value to load up on picks because Jerry loves his picks, they are his babies.

 

[Jarv]

You seem to be missing a key component.
Rather than attempt to explain it to you, I'll do this instead.

Dak had 403 yards passing in his last game.
He had great stats! Oh, by the way, he lost that game and was a big reason why the team was down 27-0 just before halftime and 48-16 after 3 quarters.

Stats don't mean much when they don't come with a win.

Perfect explanation

 

[America's Cowboy]

We should be trading players, keeping some to resign.

I have 4 players I would consider trading.

Dak, but has a no trade clause

CD, at the park of his value

Parsons, peak of value

Martin, before he loses his value.

Not saying that I would trade all of them, but those are the top of my list.

We're terrible at cap management because we don't trade "our guys" why they still have value to load up on picks because Jerry loves his picks, they are his babies.

Don't forget, this team is bad at building up lesser talented players. It might be the biggest reason they keep those handful of older and overpaid players.

 

[Chasing6]

I'm just saying, paying 3-5 players exorbitant amount of money while unable to pat more for a better playoff capable team has not work for the Cowboys to even come close to sniffing a Super Bowl for almost 30 years now.

You are 100% correct.

So the question becomes the following:

1. Do you need a top 5 RB to win the SB?
2. Do you need a top 5 WR to win a SB?
3. Do you need a top 5 Pass Rusher to win a SB?
4. Do you need a top 10 QB to win a SB?

 

[Jarv]

Don't forget, this team is bad at building up lesser talented players. It might be the biggest reason they keep those handful of older and overpaid players.

You mean coaching? If si I agree with you 100%.

Let's celebrate!

 

[Chasing6]

We should be trading players, keeping some to resign.

I have 4 players I would consider trading.

Dak, but has a no trade clause

CD, at the park of his value

Parsons, peak of value

Martin, before he loses his value.

Not saying that I would trade all of them, but those are the top of my list.

We're terrible at cap management because we don't trade "our guys" why they still have value to load up on picks because Jerry loves his picks, they are his babies.

If you can trade a player, and potentially replace them in the draft at a fraction of the price, what is their to think about?

 

[Jarv]

If you can trade a player, and potentially replace them in the draft at a fraction of the price, what is their to think about?

You need value from a trade, like the ones I mentioned, to get a pick good enough to replace them.