The narrative that we should have paid players sooner?

[Coogiguy03]

There's been a narrative painted that we wait too long to pay our players. Are they deserving to us not always, but it's not about us, Jerry or anyone but what the market dictates. With that said, we go ahead and sign for example CEEDEE Lamb early. What makes him later in the contract realize that, uh oh I'm being underpaid due to other players at my position resetting the market?

Yes he has a contract and the teams can clearly say no, and he can hold out to see if the team will give him more money. I want to say it was most recently done with Martin maybe. Has a contract, but realizes hey I need more! What to do just let the player sit out, or do we always need to cave in?? Please give your thoughts

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

You’re trusting players to honor their contracts.

The best at their positions rarely do.

Paying them early or paying them late won’t matter. As soon as they feel they are getting passed up money wise by others who they feel aren’t as good as them they will start their little “I need more money” tantrums.

 

[kskboys]

.....is a silly narrative. Really doesn't make any sense. Unless the player is agreeing to a much reduced contract, it's almost irrelevant.

The ones who are reasonable, Diggs for example, do sign early.

 

[CATCH17]

I don’t know what the Cowboys should do anymore.

I hate that this season is lost before it ever starts because of salary cap concerns.

 

[Reality]

You’re trusting players to honor their contracts.

The best at their positions rarely do.

Paying them early or paying them late won’t matter. As soon as they feel they are getting passed up money wise by others who they feel aren’t as good as them they will start their little “I need more money” tantrums

I don't fault players for trying to make the most money they can (their careers are short as it is), but I strongly dislike the "upfront" (signing bonus) money that's paid to players because it encourages them to whine about their contract before it ends and sometimes after only 1-2 years into it.

For example, if you give a player a 5 year contract for $50 million, but give them $30 million of it upfront ($25 million signing bonus and $5 million salary), the player looks at it like they made $30 million in year 1, then whines they are being vastly underpaid in year 2, 3, etc. as they make only a paultry $5 million per season.

At the same time, other players are getting their new contracts and are making $30 million in a year they are now making $5 million, because to them, that $25 million paid upfront was for the first season, not pro-rated amount.

Fans chime in and say, "It's insulting that the player is only making $5 million per year when the market is paying 5-6 times that", because many fans have little understanding of how NFL contracts work but assume they do.

I have no issue with guaranteed money paid to players, but it should be paid out the same way it is impacting the salary cap, which is pro-rated over every year of the contract.

 

[kskboys]

I don't fault players for trying to make the most money they can (their careers are short as it is), but I strongly dislike the "upfront" (signing bonus) money that's paid to players because it encourages them to whine about their contract before it ends and sometimes after only 1-2 years into it.

For example, if you give a player a 5 year contract for $50 million, but give them $30 million of it upfront ($25 million signing bonus and $5 million salary), the player looks at it like they made $30 million in year 1, then whines they are being vastly underpaid in year 2, 3, etc. as they make only a paultry $5 million per season.

At the same time, other players are getting their new contracts and are making $30 million in a year they are now making $5 million, because to them, that $25 million paid upfront was for the first season, not pro-rated amount.

Fans chime in and say, "It's insulting that the player is only making $5 million per year when the market is paying 5-6 times that", because many fans have little understanding of how NFL contracts work but assume they do.

I have no issue with guaranteed money paid to players, but it should be paid out the same way it is impacting the salary cap, which is pro-rated over ever year of the contract.

Good point.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

I think it works perfectly with certain players but only those on rookie contracts who played at a high level at least their first two of three in the league. For example, Mazi Smith was a 1st round pick who still hasn't cracked the starting lineup going into his 3rd year. Let's assume by some miracle he starts and makes ALL-Pro after the season. Since this will be the end of his 3rd year, we can sign to a new deal but would you? You have under your control for at least 3, maybe 4 (4th rookie year, 5th-year option, 1st tag, and 2nd tag) more years w/o a new deal.

Remember this scenario he's coming off an ALL-Pro year so he's probably looking for top 10 money at his position. So no way am I signing him early since it would be cheap to wait another 3 years. Not to mention, some positions are escalating faster than others. It is not cut and dry but IMO as a general rule, if you know he's part of your long-term future and he is a starter, the sooner you get his name on the huge 2nd contract the better.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

I don't fault players for trying to make the most money they can (their careers are short as it is), but I strongly dislike the "upfront" (signing bonus) money that's paid to players because it encourages them to whine about their contract before it ends and sometimes after only 1-2 years into it.

For example, if you give a player a 5 year contract for $50 million, but give them $30 million of it upfront ($25 million signing bonus and $5 million salary), the player looks at it like they made $30 million in year 1, then whines they are being vastly underpaid in year 2, 3, etc. as they make only a paultry $5 million per season.

At the same time, other players are getting their new contracts and are making $30 million in a year they are now making $5 million, because to them, that $25 million paid upfront was for the first season, not pro-rated amount.

Fans chime in and say, "It's insulting that the player is only making $5 million per year when the market is paying 5-6 times that", because many fans have little understanding of how NFL contracts work but assume they do.

I have no issue with guaranteed money paid to players, but it should be paid out the same way it is impacting the salary cap, which is pro-rated over every year of the contract.

Well, you will love Lawrence's deal .......$142M to sign.

 

[jrumann59]

If you ask fans they will say yes but then 2 years in complain that Player X should not have been re-signed for <insert reason> and should have waited.

 

[ChuckA1]

I don't fault players for trying to make the most money they can (their careers are short as it is), but I strongly dislike the "upfront" (signing bonus) money that's paid to players because it encourages them to whine about their contract before it ends and sometimes after only 1-2 years into it.

For example, if you give a player a 5 year contract for $50 million, but give them $30 million of it upfront ($25 million signing bonus and $5 million salary), the player looks at it like they made $30 million in year 1, then whines they are being vastly underpaid in year 2, 3, etc. as they make only a paultry $5 million per season.

At the same time, other players are getting their new contracts and are making $30 million in a year they are now making $5 million, because to them, that $25 million paid upfront was for the first season, not pro-rated amount.

Fans chime in and say, "It's insulting that the player is only making $5 million per year when the market is paying 5-6 times that", because many fans have little understanding of how NFL contracts work but assume they do.

I have no issue with guaranteed money paid to players, but it should be paid out the same way it is impacting the salary cap, which is pro-rated over every year of the contract.

You're being far too reasonable.

 

[JBS]

I don't fault players for trying to make the most money they can (their careers are short as it is), but I strongly dislike the "upfront" (signing bonus) money that's paid to players because it encourages them to whine about their contract before it ends and sometimes after only 1-2 years into it.

For example, if you give a player a 5 year contract for $50 million, but give them $30 million of it upfront ($25 million signing bonus and $5 million salary), the player looks at it like they made $30 million in year 1, then whines they are being vastly underpaid in year 2, 3, etc. as they make only a paultry $5 million per season.

At the same time, other players are getting their new contracts and are making $30 million in a year they are now making $5 million, because to them, that $25 million paid upfront was for the first season, not pro-rated amount.

Fans chime in and say, "It's insulting that the player is only making $5 million per year when the market is paying 5-6 times that", because many fans have little understanding of how NFL contracts work but assume they do.

I have no issue with guaranteed money paid to players, but it should be paid out the same way it is impacting the salary cap, which is pro-rated over every year of the contract.

This is a fair point but this isn’t anything that has happened on this team. At least not frequently.

 

[JoeKing]

There's been a narrative painted that we wait too long to pay our players. Are they deserving to us not always, but it's not about us, Jerry or anyone but what the market dictates. With that said, we go ahead and sign for example CEEDEE Lamb early. What makes him later in the contract realize that, uh oh I'm being underpaid due to other players at my position resetting the market?

Yes he has a contract and the teams can clearly say no, and he can hold out to see if the team will give him more money. I want to say it was most recently done with Martin maybe. Has a contract, but realizes hey I need more! What to do just let the player sit out, or do we always need to cave in?? Please give your thoughts

Also... it takes two parties to agree to make a deal. I don't think the player has agreed with the Cowboys' offer in the Lamb & Prescott contract negotiations.

 

[Coogiguy03]

I don't fault players for trying to make the most money they can (their careers are short as it is), but I strongly dislike the "upfront" (signing bonus) money that's paid to players because it encourages them to whine about their contract before it ends and sometimes after only 1-2 years into it.

For example, if you give a player a 5 year contract for $50 million, but give them $30 million of it upfront ($25 million signing bonus and $5 million salary), the player looks at it like they made $30 million in year 1, then whines they are being vastly underpaid in year 2, 3, etc. as they make only a paultry $5 million per season.

At the same time, other players are getting their new contracts and are making $30 million in a year they are now making $5 million, because to them, that $25 million paid upfront was for the first season, not pro-rated amount.

Fans chime in and say, "It's insulting that the player is only making $5 million per year when the market is paying 5-6 times that", because many fans have little understanding of how NFL contracts work but assume they do.

I have no issue with guaranteed money paid to players, but it should be paid out the same way it is impacting the salary cap, which is pro-rated over every year of the contract.

Fans jump in then complain that said player is making too much and doesn't deserve it

 

[Coogiguy03]

Also... it takes two parties to agree to make a deal. I don't think the player has agreed with the Cowboys' offer in the Lamb & Prescott contract negotiations.

Yeah true but what stops a player from holding out

 

[charron]

Players should try to make the most money, nothing wrong with that. It's up to the organization to decide how it wants to operate in regards to paying large amounts of money to players. I hate that the Cowboys choose to overpay their own players rather than trading them or letting them walk.

 

[fivetwos]

They aren’t any good at this, despite what they think of themselves.

They think they are outsmarting the rest of the world by things like signing Gallup and Steele off injuries and think they are getting a bargain.

Then get burned and make guys like Lamb and Parsons wait, only to watch the price increase considerably.

This team came with INCHES of getting K’Lavon Chiasson instead of Lamb, and JC Horn instead of Parsons. They also wanted to give Gregory 5/70. All of those were expected to be likely to happen ant the time…and if they did, there would be no playoff choke narrative because this team would be in the toilet right now.

Incapable of recognizing what they have and don’t have, and windows within which to win before salaries get too out of hand and your depth is gone. They aren’t good at this.

Yeah, keep thinking you can draft studs in every round every year and they will all be great immediately. It’s never going to work, and that’s more of a Stephen plan than a Jerry one, so I don’t really know where this is going anytime soon.

 

[Rockport]

I don’t know what the Cowboys should do anymore.

I hate that this season is lost before it ever starts because of salary cap concerns.

You give up too easily.

 

[Reality]

This is a fair point but this isn’t anything that has happened on this team. At least not frequently.

That's because for years the Cowboys' salary cap has forced them to extend players regularly by a year or two without the player even asking for it so the team could free up salary cap space.

 

[Ranching]

Fans jump in then complain that said player is making too much and doesn't deserve it

Our fans don't complain!!

 

[DandyDon52]

There's been a narrative painted that we wait too long to pay our players. Are they deserving to us not always, but it's not about us, Jerry or anyone but what the market dictates. With that said, we go ahead and sign for example CEEDEE Lamb early. What makes him later in the contract realize that, uh oh I'm being underpaid due to other players at my position resetting the market?

Yes he has a contract and the teams can clearly say no, and he can hold out to see if the team will give him more money. I want to say it was most recently done with Martin maybe. Has a contract, but realizes hey I need more! What to do just let the player sit out, or do we always need to cave in?? Please give your thoughts

Players are part of the problem, they hold out and refuse offers, ask for too much, trying to get the most they can.
They dont care about the team, and the rest of the guys who will make less,they dont care about winning, just getting their "bag"
Those type players rarely earn the bag afterwards.