Stephen says Cowboys will finalize franchise tag for George Pickens

[Coogiguy03]

Well, I look at it this way, as much as I like George Pickens here, and maybe if he takes 30, I'm good with that, but not over 30,

But the whole concept of striking while the iron's hot, you know they say, that you should do it when your quarterbacks on a rookie deal, but you should do it when your team is young and you haven't paid out a bunch of big contracts,

I thought that was the concept in a capped league...

Once you get to where you're at with teams like Dallas, who are paying their quarterback, that much they're already paying a receiver that much, a linemen that much, a running back that much, those teams then have to build differently, and I don't understand the concept of now we need to pay the second receiver that much, because it seems to be normal, when really it's not.

Having a guy like Jefferson on one side and having a guy like Addison on a rookie deal, that's what you hope for, It might be tough to get that guy, but that is the reality, not all teams can afford two receivers that cost that much.

So yes, if it's reasonable, keep him, but if it becomes this money grab, then you have to move him.

I don't understand fans being scared to do with pretty much all teams do, you hope you finally find your elite wide receiver and you sign him, you have a great quarterback, however you rank him, it doesn't matter to me, we have a very good quarterback, We have a solid run game,

I don't see the need to have to put a second receiver on the team making that much money.

If I'm the GM, I'm running for that high first round draft pick for George Pickens, and turning it into multiple picks, getting a wide receiver in the draft, getting a better left tackle, and building the defense to be stronger, That's a good asset to have, why not consider using it.

I like how you're thinking, others on this post are somehow saying we need another all pro to replace him. It's not that serious, why not draft someone early in the draft if you can and work from there. If you can't I'm sure there's going to be some vets out there that you could bring in

 

[blueblood70]

Not that hard? You are going to sign a ALL-PRO WR in the offseason to replace Pickens? Seriously???

Yeah that's the problem here you you think that we should replace him with another All Pro that's not what teams do we have an All Pro in CD Lamb. Try to give him a complimentary guy at WR2 either through the draft through camp you let the competition work itself out if it doesn't you go get a veteran that can handle the position you know like JSN had on the other side of him..

It's not that hard to fathom a scenario where you take a high first for George Pickens, save all that money, and build differently,

IE not a lot of teams have two receivers making that kind of money, You don't need two all-pros ,it's nice to have ,we agree, it'd be nice if they could find a way to keep him ,but if he pays hardball, he wants a blank check, reset the market ,nonsense, he has to go..

They're offering scenarios to set you up for the idea that he's probably not going to be here next year, should he push this to Parsons level, because he has the same agent..

If he doesn't want to play on the tag, if he holds out, if he causes problems, you take the first rounder and you build your team out with multiple first round picks, now to turn into other picks, and you can get a wide receiver in the draft ,and other wide receivers around the NFL, not many teams have 2 receivers making 34 million or above, because that's probably what he's pushing for..

Is that concept lost on you guys, you're scared to lose an all-pro when you already have one sitting there?

The kansas City Chiefs weren't afraid to get rid of Tyreke Hill and they didn't even have a guy on the other side lots of teams do this they move on from their starters and replace them with younger starters,

in this case, we still have Lamb...

I mean we used a 3rd rounder on George Pickens because why Pittsburgh didn't see him as a critical piece??

Yes, he had a career year ,that's great, I hope we do keep the All Pro, but not many teams have two receivers that cost that much that are both all pros, that's just not typical.

Tell me that in the Super Bowl the two teams in the Super Bowl, I mean I'm trying to figure out who WR2 was that made all that money and that was an All Pro now during the 2025 season. I'm betting that's not what it looked like and many teams who are in the playoffs did not have that not at the level you would be paying George Pickens to play on the other side of Lamb..

That's how we're saying just be in the group that would consider taking a high first round pick..

He wasn't meaning it wouldn't be hard to find another All Pro, it would be,

that's not what they're going to look for, They're going to look for a guy on a rookie contract or they're going to find a veteran or a guy in camp comes out of nowhere ,That's what happens sometimes.

 

[blueblood70]

who said another all pro WR, you don't even know if Pickens will be the same player he is this season. In your eyes everything has to be all pro to replace an all pro!! Doesn't work like that

BOOM!

 

[Coogiguy03]

BOOM!

putting words in a posters mouth to fit your narrative is so big on here!!!!! Moving along, what needs to be fixed more the O or D it's clearly the D,for the amount of money you can spend on 1 player on offense, you can get SEVERAL on defense.

Doesn't mean we lose him and just go to war with the guys we have, there's always room to improve and there's ways to get other play makers for this offense than to only think about Pickens!!

 

[big dog cowboy]

you don't even know

You are doing that thingy again? Guess you haven't learned yet.

 

[phildadon86]

They can create a lot of cap space, so that $28 million will not impact what they can do in FA.

Im starting to become of the opinion I would rather them leave Daks contract alone. Unless they plan on going after Trey, I dont see many big names out there. As of now I mean. If Queen or Smith get released. You HAVE to make an attempt.

 

[Coogiguy03]

You are doing that thingy again? Guess you haven't learned yet.

Thingy, since when do you use slang

 

[big dog cowboy]

Thingy, since when do you use slang

Trying to sink to your level so you will understand.

 

[Coogiguy03]

Trying to sink to your level so you will understand.

you might want to sink yours too, you've gone overboard!!!!!!!!!!!! Captain can't even save you, that's OBVIOUS!!!

 

[Coogiguy03]

Not that hard? You are going to sign a ALL-PRO WR in the offseason to replace Pickens? Seriously???

Then you were smart enough as an organization to realize you needed another WR and you signed one in the off season!!! Not that hard!!!



WHERE did I mention us signing an all-pro, I never said that at all!!! Once again it's you making things seem as something else!!!!! Calm down

 

[blueblood70]

Then you were smart enough as an organization to realize you needed another WR and you signed one in the off season!!! Not that hard!!!



WHERE did I mention us signing an all-pro, I never said that at all!!! Once again it's you making things seem as something else!!!!! Calm down

Correct, they made it a priority last year, TET was number one on their board in the first round, they would have picked him and that would have been a great pairing with Lamb, even if there was risk.

He was gone, so they went out and looked a deal on a wide receiver ,and they got one.

they'll do the same thing if they trade George Pickens,

Yes, it's a risk, they may not find something close to him, but other teams find a way to get by.

I see a lot of teams in the playoffs that even without George Pickens, the Cowboys have an offense that can match them, just about every one of them..

Yes, with George made the Cowboys offense better, but that's not the point ,but the one thing we don't have is defense,

worst defense in the league ,can sure utilize more draft picks and money to build up that side of the ball, regardless if the Cowboys can afford to keep George Pickens or not, and still do that ,

it's easier to do with more resources.

The Cowboys thought that last offseason, if they don't have George Pickens or a true WR2, they can count on, they will make it a priority again.

Trying to figure out how he doesn't see the Seattle and New England, just picking those two teams, you look over at their offense, the Cowboys have that even without George Pickens, but what they don't have is pretty much all of those playoff teams that were in the final eight, had,

way better defenses than us.

 

[blueblood70]

Trying to sink to your level so you will understand.

Look man, there's always a risk it's ,nice if we can find a way to keep George Pickens,

but it's also not going to be a huge deal to trade him and use the resources and assets we can get for him, to help build the rest of the team faster.

WE can Play the What if game all the time, what if Flo and Lamb gets hur,t well what if we sign George Pickens to a mega deal, and we lose Prescott for the rest of the year, say game three, now we have all that money tied up on that side of the ball, while the defense is still trying to find their identity,

FYI you can't build your team worried about injuries to major players because not a lot of teams have the depth to cover that up and that's just normal you find ways to get by.

But if the Cowboys can build their team better, a better left tackle, and a lot better defense, and use those resources towards that this team can stay afloat if they have injuries at key positions.

if you Learned anything from last year's playoff runs, is most of those teams, especially in the final 8, but the two Super Bowl teams had ridiculously good defenses, but the Cowboys even without George Pickens, can match their offense. They didn't have anything that special on offense that the Cowboys don't have, even sans George Pickens.

Of Course, our offense is better with him, but they can make enough adjustments without him...

 

[Coogiguy03]

Correct, they made it a priority last year, TET was number one on their board in the first round, they would have picked him and that would have been a great pairing with Lamb, even if there was risk.

He was gone, so they went out and looked a deal on a wide receiver ,and they got one.

they'll do the same thing if they trade George Pickens,

Yes, it's a risk, they may not find something close to him, but other teams find a way to get by.

I see a lot of teams in the playoffs that even without George Pickens, the Cowboys have an offense that can match them, just about every one of them..

Yes, with George made the Cowboys offense better, but that's not the point ,but the one thing we don't have is defense,

worst defense in the league ,can sure utilize more draft picks and money to build up that side of the ball, regardless if the Cowboys can afford to keep George Pickens or not, and still do that ,

it's easier to do with more resources.

The Cowboys thought that last offseason, if they don't have George Pickens or a true WR2, they can count on, they will make it a priority again.

Trying to figure out how he doesn't see the Seattle and New England, just picking those two teams, you look over at their offense, the Cowboys have that even without George Pickens, but what they don't have is pretty much all of those playoff teams that were in the final eight, had,

way better defenses than us.

yeah hell I guess sometimes less is more!!!!

 

[Coogiguy03]

Look man, there's always a risk it's ,nice if we can find a way to keep George Pickens,

but it's also not going to be a huge deal to trade him and use the resources and assets we can get for him, to help build the rest of the team faster.

WE can Play the What if game all the time, what if Flo and Lamb gets hur,t well what if we sign George Pickens to a mega deal, and we lose Prescott for the rest of the year, say game three, now we have all that money tied up on that side of the ball, while the defense is still trying to find their identity,

FYI you can't build your team worried about injuries to major players because not a lot of teams have the depth to cover that up and that's just normal you find ways to get by.

But if the Cowboys can build their team better, a better left tackle, and a lot better defense, and use those resources towards that this team can stay afloat if they have injuries at key positions.

if you Learned anything from last year's playoff runs, is most of those teams, especially in the final 8, but the two Super Bowl teams had ridiculously good defenses, but the Cowboys even without George Pickens, can match their offense. They didn't have anything that special on offense that the Cowboys don't have, even sans George Pickens.

Of Course, our offense is better with him, but they can make enough adjustments without him...

 

[thunderpimp91]

Look man, there's always a risk it's ,nice if we can find a way to keep George Pickens,

but it's also not going to be a huge deal to trade him and use the resources and assets we can get for him, to help build the rest of the team faster.

Its odd to me that so many people have hard line stances on Pickens. We should really be open minded to either scenario with him. If someone wants to give up enough in a trade where you can't say no then you trade Pickens. If Pickens contract demands are unreasonable you trade Pickens. If you can find a reasonable number that works for both sides you welcome him back and embrace having maybe the best WR duo in football.

There really isnt a wrong answer here, its just a matter of what a reasonable contract looks like and what another team may give up in a trade that justifies losing Pickens. Trading him and keeping him can both end up being successful moves for the Cowboys. The only real bad move I would say is if they end up keeping him on the tag.

 

[sunalsorises]

Well, I look at it this way, as much as I like George Pickens here, and maybe if he takes 30, I'm good with that, but not over 30,

But the whole concept of striking while the iron's hot, you know they say, that you should do it when your quarterbacks on a rookie deal, but you should do it when your team is young and you haven't paid out a bunch of big contracts,

I thought that was the concept in a capped league...

Once you get to where you're at with teams like Dallas, who are paying their quarterback, that much they're already paying a receiver that much, a linemen that much, a running back that much, those teams then have to build differently, and I don't understand the concept of now we need to pay the second receiver that much, because it seems to be normal, when really it's not.

Having a guy like Jefferson on one side and having a guy like Addison on a rookie deal, that's what you hope for, It might be tough to get that guy, but that is the reality, not all teams can afford two receivers that cost that much.

So yes, if it's reasonable, keep him, but if it becomes this money grab, then you have to move him.

I don't understand fans being scared to do with pretty much all teams do, you hope you finally find your elite wide receiver and you sign him, you have a great quarterback, however you rank him, it doesn't matter to me, we have a very good quarterback, We have a solid run game,

I don't see the need to have to put a second receiver on the team making that much money.

If I'm the GM, I'm running for that high first round draft pick for George Pickens, and turning it into multiple picks, getting a wide receiver in the draft, getting a better left tackle, and building the defense to be stronger, That's a good asset to have, why not consider using it.

It might have been smart to move him at the trade deadline last season then. Jerry still thought the team had a chance at the Super Bowl and became a buyer instead. Dallas might be able to get more for Pickens after the draft this year if a team doesn't end up with the receiver they hoped but that will be for next year's draft capital and Jerry never plans that far ahead. He is going to have another we can win this year mindset.

 

[ConstantReboot]

I am not a cap expert. But we are $25M in hole currently. $28M to tag Pickens. Need approximately $10M for rookies and it is nice to have $8M to $10M going into the season for emergencies.

That right there is almost $75M alone, without really doing anything. We still need to sign Aubrey - I would expect at least $8M. Sounds like they are hoping to bring Clowney back.

i think my option gives a better chance to win.

Dak had a better year in 2023 without Pickens.

That 2023 stat is misleading. Dak looks better on paper, but the context matters. He had a top-five scoring defense creating turnovers, setting up short fields, and even scoring points. That kind of support keeps games closer and makes the offense look more efficient than it really was. He was certainly better in 2025 because of the passing attack with Pickens and Ceedee.

 

[Jipper]

Absolutely no way I'm taking a second for George Pickens, I'm all for giving up George Pickens for a first-round pick, and it had to be a top 10 first round pick, if it's Lower first rounder, I'm going to also want a third!!


there's no way you give away George Pickens for a second, that's just not happening,

you have these people talking about market setting money, like he a topflight, top three guy, and that's what he's going to be asking for in pay, Yet you think you can only get a 2nd for him?

which is it?

it sounds like people are at odds because if he's only worth the 2nd round pick, you should be able to sign him for 30 million Max, right?? but if you could get high first round pick a first and a third that means his value is over 35, that he's a top flight starter...

I think that's the problem here,

that's why you tag him and you see what offers there are nonexclusive tag, let's see where his value is, this will help in the negotiation process,

but I'm going to say this again there is no way I'd let him go for a 2nd..

nope

i get it dude, and yes i am on record saying hes absolutly worth a 1st.

My worry on this one is if he is acting out on this one, refuses to sign and makes a big stink does it diminish his value and make a 2nd an option?

I cant read the tea leaves on this one but based on a few indicators with pickens i wouldnt be shocked if he acted out on this one...

Should Jerry and son sign him prior to the draft and hes got a deal that is either 1 right sized or 2 has the right structure then a 1st and a 3rd should be easy to snag ...question is if they will do that

 

[jaythecowboy]

I dont get the point of it unless they want work on a contract or trade next offseason.

He’s only had one year looking this good so it makes sense to see it another year before committing to a big contract.

 

[AstroPilota]

Alec Pierce will sign before him, and JSN will sign before him, and Puka will sign before I’m not making fun, There has to be some logic to treating players like this. I’m genuinely curious on why they do it; there has to be an interesting reason

Don't discount that a lot of the Cowboys late-signing problems could strongly involve the players agents just holding out until the last minute. Agents all know that this is, or has been, a very successful tactic against the Cowboys. It takes all 3 parties to agree. Once a negotiating precedent has been set, it's hard to break.