CFZ Two different philosophies to build an NFL championship roster

[Strol]

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.

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?

There needs to be 3 categories 1. Teams who pay an elite QB. 2. Teams who pay a non elite QB 3. Teams with a QB on rookie deal. Dallas is 2. The absolute one place you dont want to be.

 

[ConstantReboot]

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.

Drafting is important. But so has free agency. Both the Eagles and Chiefs improved their teams through FA. The Chiefs lost T. Hill to free agency, they filled that void by drafting Sky Moore and acquired more talent.

On the other hand, the Eagles can't draft a receiver. So they opted to trade for one.

We lost Amari Cooper. We didn't fill that void when we could have. It came back to bite us against the 49ers.

Jerry and Stephen are too blame. It's their lack of football knowledge that is holding this team back. They make mistakes and double down on it trying to prove to everyone that they are smarter than they seem.

 

[CowboyoWales]

There needs to be 3 categories 1. Teams who pay an elite QB. 2. Teams who pay a non elite QB 3. Teams with a QB on rookie deal. Dallas is 2. The absolute one place you dont want to be.

There's an adage that if the QB hasn't won a SB on his Rookie Deal, he's hardly likely to do so when he's earning a 5th of the CAP.

Problem is that there's a fair few fans who criticise the Jones' for liking 'Our Guy's', when sticking with, and supporting, Dak is EXACTLY the same thing.

 

[noshame]

Draft a solid QB.
A QB has to make your team better CONSISTENTLY. Big games are always pressure packed, you cannot fold, you step up.
If there's flaws, they'll be exposed.
Aaron Rodgers was the 24th pick, Brady was a sixth rounder. You don't need to use draft capital, you need to find a accurate passer and build a system around the player.
Oh yeah, a HC helps.

 

[CowboyoWales]

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?

The 'New Model' was exactly what allowed Dak to thrive....the HoF O-Line, with Rookie Deal Zeke, Dez (even Witten and Beasley) would elevate any QB.

 

[CowboyoWales]

Draft a solid QB.
A QB has to make your team better CONSISTENTLY. Big games are always pressure packed, you cannot fold, you step up.

.....yep, there's nothing wrong having a good game managing QB, but if you're going to pay him a 5th of the CAP you've got to expect at LEAST consistency (and NOT expecting other less resourced areas of the Offense to step up).
That 9ers game should make the FO even more adamant about NOT going all-in behind Dak....as it outlined mental limitations under pressure.

 

[noshame]

.....yep, there's nothing wrong having a good game managing QB, but if you're going to pay him a 5th of the CAP you've got to expect at LEAST consistency (and NOT expecting other less resourced areas of the Offense to step up).
That 9ers game should make the FO even more adamant about NOT going all-in behind Dak....as it outlined mental limitations under pressure.

Problem being
They already went all in. Lol

 

[CowboyoWales]

Problem being
They already went all in. Lol

Yep it's whether they are brave enough to tell Dak that he needs to prove (any earn any extension) by performing in 2023.
Restructure SOME salary into bonus, improve roster, that benefits subsequent years not just 2023.

 

[noshame]

Yep it's whether they are brave enough to tell Dak that he needs to prove (any earn any extension) by performing in 2023.
Restructure SOME salary into bonus, improve roster, that benefits subsequent years not just 2023.

I still would like to know if they pay back his full salary this year what would be the cost of releasing him after June 1st 2024

You know, just in case both him and Mike McCarthy need to go

 

[buybuydandavis]

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.

The exception proves the rule.

Mahomes is the best QB in the league and last year was the 1st year he has taken a significant cap hit, coming after 4 years of nothing QB cap hits to build up a team around the QB position.

At this point, the lesson on Mahomes is still to build your team with a cheap QB taking no cap hit, then maybe sign a top QB to real money to squeeze out a couple of SBs before the QB cap hit catches up with you.

Treat QBs like running backs. Keep em cheap, keep em coming.
If you have a chance for a top QB *after* you've built the rest of a SB team, then you think about signing him to get your SBs.
Otherwise, keep working at it. Keep em coming, and keep building the rest of the team.

The main thing to avoid is what we've done - locking in a not elite QB at elite money, and paying lots of money to older veterans besides. No money to build the team, and declining assets with dead cap overhang to handicap you once they're gone.

Total cap $224.8
Our top cap hits to players 30 and over next year.
Dak 49, Tyron 18, Martin 20, DLaw 26 = 113
Over half the cap in these 4 players.

Clown Team

 

[shabazz]

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?

Bob, I have to go with the elite Qb scenario. The Niners have done exactly one of your options by building a complete team and going with either rookie qbs or qbs on cheap contracts and the one thing that has stopped their playoff runs have been poor to average quarterback play.

the last few qbs that have won the last 9 SBs are Mahomes, Stafford, Manning, Brady which were elite at the time. The only outlier was Foles winning with the Eagles…….just food for thought.

 

[buybuydandavis]

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.

Nope.

Even if your QB is not good enough to win w/o help, years of a cheap QB let you build the rest of the team around the QB position, make it cap ready and talent ready for a SB run when you have the option to sell out and sign a top tier QB and other free agents.

And a top tier QB likely comes at a discount if they want a ring. That's what The GOAT did. That's what QBs nearing the end with any sense will do. Post-retirement status, and therefore income flow, is hugely boosted for a QB by winning a ring.

 

[cowboybish]

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?

I think it’s easier to put pieces around a young quarterback, and be able to make the decision before you have to pay the big contract. Therefore, I would pick a second round quarterback, every other year to develop, and be ready to plug in before you have to commit the big dollars to the position.

 

[kskboys]

Here's the problem. At any given time, there are generally only 2-3 elite QBs in the NFL. You can pay Mahomes, you can pay Burrows, but at present the list stops there. Herbert and Barbie are the next two that may become that.

The further down the list you go, the more you need around them. And that's the problem w/ paying a QB not in the top 3 or so huge money, it pretty much makes it impossible to contend for a super bowl.

DEN is in the process of finding that out w/ Russell Wilson.

Bills appear to be on the brink of becoming the latest example, w/ Allen getting paid. They released their starting DT and CB and OT in the off. It'll be interesting to watch what happens w/ that #1 D in 21. Are they going to have to release more players? And will Allen start getting hurt as he'll be asked to do more and more as the Bills have to release players to pay him?

 

[kskboys]

The exception proves the rule.

Mahomes is the best QB in the league and last year was the 1st year he has taken a significant cap hit, coming after 4 years of nothing QB cap hits to build up a team around the QB position.

At this point, the lesson on Mahomes is still to build your team with a cheap QB taking no cap hit, then maybe sign a top QB to real money to squeeze out a couple of SBs before the QB cap hit catches up with you.

Treat QBs like running backs. Keep em cheap, keep em coming.
If you have a chance for a top QB *after* you've built the rest of a SB team, then you think about signing him to get your SBs.
Otherwise, keep working at it. Keep em coming, and keep building the rest of the team.

The main thing to avoid is what we've done - locking in a not elite QB at elite money, and paying lots of money to older veterans besides. No money to build the team, and declining assets with dead cap overhang to handicap you once they're gone.

Total cap $224.8
Our top cap hits to players 30 and over next year.
Dak 49, Tyron 18, Martin 20, DLaw 26 = 113
Over half the cap in these 4 players.

Clown Team

And where will the Chiefs be after Chris Jones retires? Among others, of course. Was this the Chiefs last gasp? How much will they lose in the off?

 

[Reid1boys]

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?

My thoughts????? Are either of those either a "Philosophy?"
If you are lucky enough to Land a Mahomes, Burrow type QB.... you arent choosing your first option.... it is forced upon you. The chiefs were going to empty the vault and pay Mahomes any amount he wanted, and they did and got a STEAL of a deal that will be redone in 2 years.

The Iggles just happened to have a guy they drafted in the 2nd rd and it worked perfectly for them and he is a starter, thus they have a short time frame to add players while their guy is on a rookie deal. BUT, just like all rookie deals, his is expiring.... so if the Iggles Philosophy is to build around the QB on rookie deal, does that mean that will kick Hurts to the curb and draft another QB to keep that position on a rookie deal? I mean, afterall, according to your premise, thats the philosophy of the Iggles, no?Name me ONE, just ONE TEAM that does your second philosophy more than 1 time?

Lets see..... you think the Bengals will take that route? The Chargers? Nah... NOBODY not a single damn team does either of your philosophy examples BY CHOICE. You jsut get whatever you get. So the Bengals got their guy and he popped immediately so they can obviously take your "Choice," number 2.... until its time for Burrow's deal to get redone, and then they go to your 1st "Choice," but like I said, the reality is there was no choice involved.

So Like I said, please name me a single team that CHOOSES to do as you say and build around QBs on rookie deals.... show me a team that has drafted a kid, kept him with success and then told him to hit the curb when it was time for his second contract and then let another rookie take over.

 

[Reid1boys]

And where will the Chiefs be after Chris Jones retires? Among others, of course. Was this the Chiefs last gasp? How much will they lose in the off?

the chiefs last gasp? lol... better get used to the chiefs in the afc title game and super bowls, just like the pats were. Oh wait, they just lost their OC. I forgot about that....... they might not make the playoffs next year.

 

[kskboys]

My thoughts????? Are either of those either a "Philosophy?"
If you are lucky enough to Land a Mahomes, Burrow type QB.... you arent choosing your first option.... it is forced upon you. The chiefs were going to empty the vault and pay Mahomes any amount he wanted, and they did and got a STEAL of a deal that will be redone in 2 years.

The Iggles just happened to have a guy they drafted in the 2nd rd and it worked perfectly for them and he is a starter, thus they have a short time frame to add players while their guy is on a rookie deal. BUT, just like all rookie deals, his is expiring.... so if the Iggles Philosophy is to build around the QB on rookie deal, does that mean that will kick Hurts to the curb and draft another QB to keep that position on a rookie deal? I mean, afterall, according to your premise, thats the philosophy of the Iggles, no?Name me ONE, just ONE TEAM that does your second philosophy more than 1 time?

Lets see..... you think the Bengals will take that route? The Chargers? Nah... NOBODY not a single damn team does either of your philosophy examples BY CHOICE. You jsut get whatever you get. So the Bengals got their guy and he popped immediately so they can obviously take your "Choice," number 2.... until its time for Burrow's deal to get redone, and then they go to your 1st "Choice," but like I said, the reality is there was no choice involved.

So Like I said, please name me a single team that CHOOSES to do as you say and build around QBs on rookie deals.... show me a team that has drafted a kid, kept him with success and then told him to hit the curb when it was time for his second contract and then let another rookie take over.

Have to agree.

If you don't have a QB, you have nothing. Success like Foles had is an outlier, not to be copied. You need a franchise type QB. Someone who doesn't turn the ball over in key times, consistently moves the ball, and has the backing of his teammates.

 

[kskboys]

the chiefs last gasp? lol... better get used to the chiefs in the afc title game and super bowls, just like the pats were. Oh wait, they just lost their OC. I forgot about that....... they might not make the playoffs next year.

Hard to say. When analyzing, you must take everything into account. You're not addressing the fact of stalwarts needing to be replaced such as Chris Jones, and Mahomes having to deal w/ poor play at some point on the O due to injuries and age. Hyperbole is not an answer.

 

[LatinMind]

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?

My thoughts are Jerry just said they should be drafting qbs every yr. I don't think Jerry has ever been 100% behind dak. He was always propping Romo hoping he would get healthy enough to start. And you camn bet if he was he would've started the first game he could. Jerry excitement when Romo played vs Philly was telling too.

If everybody else in the front office wasn't behind dak he never would've gotten that 2nd deal imo. You see a stark difference the way Jerry treats Elliot and how he is with dak. Even how he speaks about them. Just the enthusiasm he has when talking bout elliot