CFZ Two different philosophies to build an NFL championship roster

[Bobhaze]

Super 57 was not only a good game to watch, it was an interesting matchup showing two different philosophies to build a championship roster.
Those two philosophies are:

• Build a roster around a highly paid QB (Traditional model)
• Build a more complete roster with a decent QB on a rookie deal (New model)

The last decade or more, conventional thinking was that if you find a young starting QB that is good enough to be a success in the regular season and can get you to the playoffs, you hang onto that QB and pay them market value to build around. It has been a popular idea but the loss of additional cap space to the QB position puts a ton of pressure on the FO to be able to build an overall quality roster without much cap space to work with.

As hard as it is to find even decent QBs, most teams that found a good young QB were willing to make that commitment. To the joy of some fans and the frustration of others, the Cowboys FO made that commitment to Dak Prescott going into the 2021 season with a big contract at market value. Agree or disagree, it was a “traditional” model decision. It what JJ clearly prefers going back years. So far, it has certainly not worked out well for the Cowboys with both Tony Romo and Dak.

BUT…there are many teams these days choosing not to go the traditional route. They are spending cap space not on a QB but on other positions on both sides of the ball. They are aggressive in both trades and FA signings coupled with their drafts to build a roster that is not centered on the QB.

So which model is working? Answer: Both. SB champ Kansas City is certainly an example of a traditional model with Pat Mahomes as the big centerpiece. But the NFC champ eagles were an example of a team built around a rookie deal QB and a lot of help in multiple positions.

There are good and bad points to either model. Frankly, unless you have a Mahomes or Brady, committing huge amounts of cap space to the QB makes it harder to build a total roster. On the other hand, the rookie deal QB model only works if you have a young QB that’s good enough to win some playoff games with a lot of help.

I’m starting lean toward favoring the new philosophy because it does not tie your cap space down for a long time like these big contracts teams typically give to QBs on a second deal. I don’t think Jerry would ever go for the new way of thinking anyway because it would mean you’re drafting QBs every other year and rebuilding the roster often too. It does seem like the wave of the future though.

Thoughts?

 

[JayFord]

Its really not Jerry....its Stephen that won't adopt the new model

i fully believe Jerry would at least try the new model..Stephen however?

absolutely not

 

[john van brocklin]

Super 57 was not only a good game to watch, it was an interesting matchup showing two different philosophies to build a championship roster.
Those two philosophies are:

• Build a roster around a highly paid QB (Traditional model)
• Build a more complete roster with a decent QB on a rookie deal (New model)

The last decade or more, conventional thinking was that if you find a young starting QB that is good enough to be a success in the regular season and can get you to the playoffs, you hang onto that QB and pay them market value to build around. It has been a popular idea but the loss of additional cap space to the QB position puts a ton of pressure on the FO to be able to build an overall quality roster without much cap space to work with.

As hard as it is to find even decent QBs, most teams that found a good young QB were willing to make that commitment. To the joy of some fans and the frustration of others, the Cowboys FO made that commitment to Dak Prescott going into the 2021 season with a big contract at market value. Agree or disagree, it was a “traditional” model decision. It what JJ clearly prefers going back years. So far, it has certainly not worked out well for the Cowboys with both Tony Romo and Dak.

BUT…there are many teams these days choosing not to go the traditional route. They are spending cap space not on a QB but on other positions on both sides of the ball. They are aggressive in both trades and FA signings coupled with their drafts to build a roster that is not centered on the QB.

So which model is working? Answer: Both. SB champ Kansas City is certainly an example of a traditional model with Pat Mahomes as the big centerpiece. But the NFC champ eagles were an example of a team built around a rookie deal QB and a lot of help in multiple positions.

There are good and bad points to either model. Frankly, unless you have a Mahomes or Brady, committing huge amounts of cap space to the QB makes it harder to build a total roster. On the other hand, the rookie deal QB model only works if you have a young QB that’s good enough to win some playoff games with a lot of help.

I’m starting lean toward favoring the new philosophy because it does not tie your cap space down for a long time like these big contracts teams typically give to QBs on a second deal. I don’t think Jerry would ever go for the new way of thinking anyway because it would mean you’re drafting QBs every other year and rebuilding the roster often too. It does seem like the wave of the fire though.

Thoughts?

I think spending such a large amount of the cap is very risky on a non elite but good QB like Dak.
He's not good enough to carry the team, and his salary hurts the teams ability to add other quality players.

 

[Diehardblues]

Super 57 was not only a good game to watch, it was an interesting matchup showing two different philosophies to build a championship roster.
Those two philosophies are:

• Build a roster around a highly paid QB (Traditional model)
• Build a more complete roster with a decent QB on a rookie deal (New model)

The last decade or more, conventional thinking was that if you find a young starting QB that is good enough to be a success in the regular season and can get you to the playoffs, you hang onto that QB and pay them market value to build around. It has been a popular idea but the loss of additional cap space to the QB position puts a ton of pressure on the FO to be able to build an overall quality roster without much cap space to work with.

As hard as it is to find even decent QBs, most teams that found a good young QB were willing to make that commitment. To the joy of some fans and the frustration of others, the Cowboys FO made that commitment to Dak Prescott going into the 2021 season with a big contract at market value. Agree or disagree, it was a “traditional” model decision. It what JJ clearly prefers going back years. So far, it has certainly not worked out well for the Cowboys with both Tony Romo and Dak.

BUT…there are many teams these days choosing not to go the traditional route. They are spending cap space not on a QB but on other positions on both sides of the ball. They are aggressive in both trades and FA signings coupled with their drafts to build a roster that is not centered on the QB.

So which model is working? Answer: Both. SB champ Kansas City is certainly an example of a traditional model with Pat Mahomes as the big centerpiece. But the NFC champ eagles were an example of a team built around a rookie deal QB and a lot of help in multiple positions.

There are good and bad points to either model. Frankly, unless you have a Mahomes or Brady, committing huge amounts of cap space to the QB makes it harder to build a total roster. On the other hand, the rookie deal QB model only works if you have a young QB that’s good enough to win some playoff games with a lot of help.

I’m starting lean toward favoring the new philosophy because it does not tie your cap space down for a long time like these big contracts teams typically give to QBs on a second deal. I don’t think Jerry would ever go for the new way of thinking anyway because it would mean you’re drafting QBs every other year and rebuilding the roster often too. It does seem like the wave of the fire though.

Thoughts?

It’s too much work for Jethro and Son to build it the new way. They like their guys. Hang on to them and pay them. It provides a marketable product to hype and promote while remaining relative and interesting competitive team.

And I’ll throw this in there too. I know we are disappointed we haven’t been back to a championship game or SB this era but I’m not so sure we should call these eras with Romo and Prescott a complete failure. They just haven’t been as successful as we’d prefer .

But yea Bob, unless you have one of these Elite QB’s , I’d be looking to churn my QB’s like I do most of the roster. Drafting a QB every 2 or 3 years . It would also drive down these higher contracts for these less than Elite QB’s.

Im not sure franchises will do this though cause having that less than elite franchise type of QB is probably enough to build around and fans attach themselves to these stars. That’s become part of managing the Cap.

We have to recall that even for other teams that remaining relative and interesting with a competitive team is the initial priority. Fans get too caught up in this Super Bowl or bust mentality . There are successful teams and players who never make it to a Super Bowl.

 

[Ken]

Super 57 was not only a good game to watch, it was an interesting matchup showing two different philosophies to build a championship roster.
Those two philosophies are:

• Build a roster around a highly paid QB (Traditional model)
• Build a more complete roster with a decent QB on a rookie deal (New model)

The last decade or more, conventional thinking was that if you find a young starting QB that is good enough to be a success in the regular season and can get you to the playoffs, you hang onto that QB and pay them market value to build around. It has been a popular idea but the loss of additional cap space to the QB position puts a ton of pressure on the FO to be able to build an overall quality roster without much cap space to work with.

As hard as it is to find even decent QBs, most teams that found a good young QB were willing to make that commitment. To the joy of some fans and the frustration of others, the Cowboys FO made that commitment to Dak Prescott going into the 2021 season with a big contract at market value. Agree or disagree, it was a “traditional” model decision. It what JJ clearly prefers going back years. So far, it has certainly not worked out well for the Cowboys with both Tony Romo and Dak.

BUT…there are many teams these days choosing not to go the traditional route. They are spending cap space not on a QB but on other positions on both sides of the ball. They are aggressive in both trades and FA signings coupled with their drafts to build a roster that is not centered on the QB.

So which model is working? Answer: Both. SB champ Kansas City is certainly an example of a traditional model with Pat Mahomes as the big centerpiece. But the NFC champ eagles were an example of a team built around a rookie deal QB and a lot of help in multiple positions.

There are good and bad points to either model. Frankly, unless you have a Mahomes or Brady, committing huge amounts of cap space to the QB makes it harder to build a total roster. On the other hand, the rookie deal QB model only works if you have a young QB that’s good enough to win some playoff games with a lot of help.

I’m starting lean toward favoring the new philosophy because it does not tie your cap space down for a long time like these big contracts teams typically give to QBs on a second deal. I don’t think Jerry would ever go for the new way of thinking anyway because it would mean you’re drafting QBs every other year and rebuilding the roster often too. It does seem like the wave of the fire though.

Thoughts?

Good post.

I still say the traditional way to build a team thru the draft is still the best way.

3 of the 4 team in the CCs were built predominantly thru the draft. Same with last year.

The Eagles seem to be Closest to the pin with getting the best of both worlds and possibly cutting the time down between runs considerably. 49ers( even though they haven't completed the championship part) and Chiefs have been consistently good for a few years consecutively.

The Cowboys could take another jump this year if they push all in just a bit more.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

I’m starting lean toward favoring the new philosophy because it does not tie your cap space down for a long time like these big contracts teams typically give to QBs on a second deal.

That's just it, IF the "rookie/decent" QB gets you to NFCCG or Super Bowl the cheap contract is pretty much out the window coz you better believe he and the agents are coming for starting money. For example, how long do you think the 49ers can ride Purdy? Pretty sure after his 3rd year, all bets are off and he will demand $45-50M before the start of his 4th season. Hell, look at Hurts, word is he's going to cost the Eagles something close to $50M.

Just me, but I don't there is any way to void paying top money to the position unless you wanna recycle it every 4-5 years and that's risky. I do think you have to hold QBs making top money more accountable to be the player you thought/need him to be. In other words, draft a guy, he lights up the league with 3 years, gets a new 2nd contract for 5 years, I want major results as deep post-season. If not, move on, and reset the position with a new QB rather than extending your current QB coz he has gotten you close.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Super 57 was not only a good game to watch, it was an interesting matchup showing two different philosophies to build a championship roster.
Those two philosophies are:

• Build a roster around a highly paid QB (Traditional model)
• Build a more complete roster with a decent QB on a rookie deal (New model)

The last decade or more, conventional thinking was that if you find a young starting QB that is good enough to be a success in the regular season and can get you to the playoffs, you hang onto that QB and pay them market value to build around. It has been a popular idea but the loss of additional cap space to the QB position puts a ton of pressure on the FO to be able to build an overall quality roster without much cap space to work with.

As hard as it is to find even decent QBs, most teams that found a good young QB were willing to make that commitment. To the joy of some fans and the frustration of others, the Cowboys FO made that commitment to Dak Prescott going into the 2021 season with a big contract at market value. Agree or disagree, it was a “traditional” model decision. It what JJ clearly prefers going back years. So far, it has certainly not worked out well for the Cowboys with both Tony Romo and Dak.

BUT…there are many teams these days choosing not to go the traditional route. They are spending cap space not on a QB but on other positions on both sides of the ball. They are aggressive in both trades and FA signings coupled with their drafts to build a roster that is not centered on the QB.

So which model is working? Answer: Both. SB champ Kansas City is certainly an example of a traditional model with Pat Mahomes as the big centerpiece. But the NFC champ eagles were an example of a team built around a rookie deal QB and a lot of help in multiple positions.

There are good and bad points to either model. Frankly, unless you have a Mahomes or Brady, committing huge amounts of cap space to the QB makes it harder to build a total roster. On the other hand, the rookie deal QB model only works if you have a young QB that’s good enough to win some playoff games with a lot of help.

I’m starting lean toward favoring the new philosophy because it does not tie your cap space down for a long time like these big contracts teams typically give to QBs on a second deal. I don’t think Jerry would ever go for the new way of thinking anyway because it would mean you’re drafting QBs every other year and rebuilding the roster often too. It does seem like the wave of the fire though.

Thoughts?

Where are you getting new model and old model?

What do you think 90s cowboys was?

That was building a championship roster around a non elite qb.

Aikman was basically a bus driver in what they asked him to do.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Its really not Jerry....its Stephen that won't adopt the new model

i fully believe Jerry would at least try the new model..Stephen however?

absolutely not

There is no model.

If you’re lucky enough to have an elite qb you’re just lucky.

If you don’t then you must build a championship roster around your non elite qb.

Either way you’re always trying to build a championship roster.

The qb is just circumstance.

 

[ICP]

This team does a few things that kill their chances year after year
1) They keep players around past their expiration dates (We like our guy's philosophy)
2) The refusal to address major needs through free agency (Again we like our guy's philosophy)
3) The continued kicking of money down the road through contract extensions which results in continuing to pay players that should be put out to pasture and limits free agency spending, but then again, 'We Like Our Guys'
4) Playing the lottery with 2nd round picks
5) Keeping the Clapping Carrot around for 10 years

I'm sure there are more

 

[CowboyRoy]

This team does a few things that kill their chances year after year
1) They keep players around past their expiration dates (We like our guy's philosophy)
2) The refusal to address major needs through free agency (Again we like our guy's philosophy)
3) The continued kicking of money down the road through contract extensions which results in continuing to pay players that should be put out to pasture and limits free agency spending, but then again, 'We Like Our Guys'
4) Playing the lottery with 2nd round picks
5) Keeping the Clapping Carrot around for 10 years

I'm sure there are more

And every single one of those is based on one huge flaw. His fan love for his own players and Jerry’s inability to be a real GM and analyze his players.

 

[CowboyRoy]

It’s too much work for Jethro and Son to build it the new way. They like their guys. Hang on to them and pay them. It provides a marketable product to hype and promote while remaining relative and interesting competitive team.

And I’ll throw this in there too. I know we are disappointed we haven’t been back to a championship game or SB this era but I’m not so sure we should call these eras with Romo and Prescott a complete failure. They just haven’t been as successful as we’d prefer .

But yea Bob, unless you have one of these Elite QB’s , I’d be looking to churn my QB’s like I do most of the roster. Drafting a QB every 2 or 3 years . It would also drive down these higher contracts for these less than Elite QB’s.

Im not sure franchises will do this though cause having that less than elite franchise type of QB is probably enough to build around and fans attach themselves to these stars. That’s become part of managing the Cap.

We have to recall that even for other teams that remaining relative and interesting with a competitive team is the initial priority. Fans get too caught up in this Super Bowl or bust mentality . There are successful teams and players who never make it to a Super Bowl.

There is no new way. Jerry had Dak on a rookie deal for 4 years and wasted it with Garrett.

 

[ICP]

And every single one of those is based on one huge flaw. His fan love for his own players and Jerry’s inability to be a real GM and analyze his players.

Man, I can't believe I forgot the #1 season killer, Jerry the GM

 

[CowboyRoy]

Man, I can't believe I forgot the #1 season killer, Jerry the GM

And that not even his affinity for puppet head coaches which would kill any championship roster.

 

[harris33]

There is no new way. Jerry had Dak on a rookie deal for 4 years and wasted it with Garrett.

Dak's first year the cowboys were pretty stacked with talent. From the outside I thought that was one of their best rosters.

 

[CashMan]

I think spending such a large amount of the cap is very risky on a non elite but good QB like Dak.
He's not good enough to carry the team, and his salary hurts the teams ability to add other quality players.

What was the other option at the time?

 

[john van brocklin]

What was the other option at the time?

Hindsight is always 20/20
But they could have signed dak earlier for less money and more years if they thought he was the future.
Would have freed up cash for other positions.

 

[CashMan]

Hindsight is always 20/20
But they could have signed dak earlier for less money and more years if they thought he was the future.
Would have freed up cash for other positions.

i don't disagree. There seems to be (2) issues, imo. #1, do we really wanna go through the crap between Aikman and Romo again? #2, The blueprint seems to be, win a SB on a rookie contract QB.

 

[Bobhaze]

Where are you getting new model and old model?

What do you think 90s cowboys was?

That was building a championship roster around a non elite qb.

Aikman was basically a bus driver in what they asked him to do.

https://www.sportico.com/leagues/fo...dvantage-with-rookie-contract-qbs-1234700643/
A lot from this article.
Btw, 8 of the 14 teams that made the playoffs had a QB on a rookie deal including 3 of 4 teams in the conference championship games.

 

[Bobhaze]

It’s too much work for Jethro and Son to build it the new way. They like their guys. Hang on to them and pay them. It provides a marketable product to hype and promote while remaining relative and interesting competitive team.

And I’ll throw this in there too. I know we are disappointed we haven’t been back to a championship game or SB this era but I’m not so sure we should call these eras with Romo and Prescott a complete failure. They just haven’t been as successful as we’d prefer .

But yea Bob, unless you have one of these Elite QB’s , I’d be looking to churn my QB’s like I do most of the roster. Drafting a QB every 2 or 3 years . It would also drive down these higher contracts for these less than Elite QB’s.

Im not sure franchises will do this though cause having that less than elite franchise type of QB is probably enough to build around and fans attach themselves to these stars. That’s become part of managing the Cap.

We have to recall that even for other teams that remaining relative and interesting with a competitive team is the initial priority. Fans get too caught up in this Super Bowl or bust mentality . There are successful teams and players who never make it to a Super Bowl.

IMO- the problem is there are only maybe 4-5 truly elite QBs. So unless you have Mahomes or Burrows you may have to find a different way to build a champion.

 

[CouchCoach]

If you get the QB, build around him. That's limited to the available studs and there aren't many and while I feel Herbert and Lawrence are on that cusp, they are not there yet.

Even Allen has some questions around his mental state to handle the job. That BUF-CIN game was a real study in QB contrast regarding pressure, self-imposed pressure. I question Allen's emotional maturity.

While I do not think Prescott is close to that stud label, it was not all his fault and this speaks to Bullet's thread. In fact, I do not feel it was mostly his fault.

Think about this for a minute. They go into the season without a real #1WR, see their QB struggle and pull the trigger on the Cooper trade. Then, they see the immediate connection with Cooper. Then they trade away Cooper and do what? Sign an injured WR, sign Washington and draft Tolbert. That's it? That, is what you are giving your QB that has already proven he needs better WR's?

The brain trust of the Cowboys did neither of Bullet's options this past season.