Understanding the NFL players' no-trade clause

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Benching Dak Prescott because he won’t settle for a contract for less than he thinks he deserves will not “irreparably damage his future earnings with another team”. It will not enhance Jerry Jones’ reputation in the eyes of players and their agents. He would be perceived as an owner that does not want to pay players what they’re worth. In addition, if the better QB is sitting while another QB is starting hardly solidifies the perception he wants to win. Many Cowboys fans question his commitment to winning. If fans already think it, now they’d be convinced of it. A ridiculous stunt like the one you’re suggesting is more stupid than petty. Not unlike many fans, apparently.

Dak just captained the worst playoff game in Cowboys history, and one of the most dubious in NFL history. Dallas then announces he will not play for all of 2024 due to their preference of starting a young QB for a better future for the franchise. There is no team in the NFL who will agree to pay a now-32 y.o. QB who hasn’t played football in a year team a contract equal to what he could get right now. It would be a significant hit to his career earnings.

 

[Adreme]

Benching Dak Prescott because he won’t settle for a contract for less than he thinks he deserves will not “irreparably damage his future earnings with another team”. It will not enhance Jerry Jones’ reputation in the eyes of players and their agents. He would be perceived as an owner that does not want to pay players what they’re worth. In addition, if the better QB is sitting while another QB is starting hardly solidifies the perception he wants to win. Many Cowboys fans question his commitment to winning. If fans already think it, now they’d be convinced of it. A ridiculous stunt like the one you’re suggesting is more stupid than petty. Not unlike many fans, apparently.

You are forgetting that benching the better player basically means you will have lost the locker room by week 3 and that means that you have no chance of winning.

 

[fivetwos]

If Atlanta offered Dak 5y 300m, I would think he’d be pretty onboard with that happening. Thats the key in most of these situations. It’s why Russell was happy to go to dilapidating Denver, why Deshaun said “who doesn’t want to play in Cleveland?”, and why Donovan Mcnabb went to Washington with a smile on his face

Right, but at that point the agent is involved and a deal is being brokered, in which case the NTC is moot. If they intended to enforce it, things never got to that stage.

They just can’t deal him off out of nowhere without permission but my point is that would never happen at that salary level and the position he plays.

 

[JBS]

I don't see any way any Cowboys players with that clause agrees to be traded.

They have it made in Dallas.

Yes. A player who has no long term contract will refuse a trade for a massive contract to another team. Brilliant thinking.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Right, but at that point the agent is involved and a deal is being brokered, in which case the NTC is moot. If they intended to enforce it, things never got to that stage.

They just can’t deal him off out of nowhere without permission but my point is that would never happen at that salary level and the position he plays.

All situations in NFL history have no precedent until the first one happened. If Dallas lets him know privately and publicly they no longer want him to represent the star, what are his options? Let them know he’s going to stick his feet in the mud and be the biggest lockerroom distraction until they cut him? If the situation turns to unwant, there’s no way Dak would push to stay.

 

[Adreme]

Dak just captained the worst playoff game in Cowboys history, and one of the most dubious in NFL history. Dallas then announces he will not play for all of 2024 due to their preference of starting a young QB for a better future for the franchise. There is no team in the NFL who will agree to pay a now-32 y.o. QB who hasn’t played football in a year team a contract equal to what he could get right now. It would be a significant hit to his career earnings.

I mean the last time they saw Dak he was 2nd team all pro (basically the 2nd best QB in football) and the only knock is he had 1 bad half in the playoffs while playing with one of the worst defensive performances in NFL history. It would have zero impact on his value just as sitting out for a year had zero impact on Watson's value.

 

[jujoboys]

Another wasted thread on Dak. He will be the Dallas Cowboys' QB in 2024. He is not going anywhere this year. He is not getting traded or cut this year. At this point the only question is whether he will be the Cowboys' starter in 2025 and into the future. The 3 realistic scenarios are the following:

1) He plays out his contract this year as is. Dallas makes cap space by working other players contracts. He either signs with Dallas next year or he signs with another team.
2) We convert his salary into a signing bonus to drop his cap hit and he plays for Dallas in 2024. He either signs with Dallas next year or he signs with another team.
3) Dallas signs him to an extension this year and he plays for Dallas 2024 and going forward.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

I mean the last time they saw Dak he was 2nd team all pro (basically the 2nd best QB in football) and the only knock is he had 1 bad half in the playoffs while playing with one of the worst defensive performances in NFL history. It would have zero impact on his value just as sitting out for a year had zero impact on Watson's value.

Watson was 25. Dak would be 1 year younger than Russ when he went to Denver

 

[Jarntt]

Unless Jerry Jones owns another team in the NFL no one will trade for Dak at the $ he and Todd want.
Guys no insult intended but believing that Dak is a top 10 QB is simply ludicrous.
His trademark is beating up on dog teams and folding like a cheap tent against real teams.
Dak will NOT be traded................

I guess this gets back to the discussion of a no trade clause. If you assume Dak didn't have one or assume he would waive it to go anywhere and you also assume he isn't looking for an extension right now...you are insane if you don't think Dak is not only tradeable but would bring back something in return. He is an NFL starting QB, who even if you want to say he is not top 10, is easily tradeable at his salary. $29 million (or even at $34M if traded before his roster bonus is due this month) for one year with no dead money after for a QB who just finished in the top couple of the MVP voting? Come on. Don't let your hatred of Dak make you look like you don't understand Football.

 

[Bobhaze]

I don't see any way any Cowboys players with that clause agrees to be traded.

They have it made in Dallas.

Unless they want to win a ring.

 

[Hawkeye0202]

All situations in NFL history have no precedent until the first one happened. If Dallas lets him know privately and publicly they no longer want him to represent the star, what are his options? Let them know he’s going to stick his feet in the mud and be the biggest lockerroom distraction until they cut him? If the situation turns to unwant, there’s no way Dak would push to stay.

And........his value would take a serious hit

 

[PAPPYDOG]

I guess this gets back to the discussion of a no trade clause. If you assume Dak didn't have one or assume he would waive it to go anywhere and you also assume he isn't looking for an extension right now...you are insane if you don't think Dak is not only tradeable but would bring back something in return. He is an NFL starting QB, who even if you want to say he is not top 10, is easily tradeable at his salary. $29 million (or even at $34M if traded before his roster bonus is due this month) for one year with no dead money after for a QB who just finished in the top couple of the MVP voting? Come on. Don't let your hatred of Dak make you look like you don't understand Football.

Please don't call me a hater as you're talking to the wrong guy.
If he was tradeable he would have been already traded as it's pretty evident there is NO extension coming down the mountain.
Why?
He hasn't earned it .........simple right?
Still early so anything is possible at this point as only the near future will tell us what Jerry thinks of Dak.
We await his decision.

 

[fivetwos]

All situations in NFL history have no precedent until the first one happened. If Dallas lets him know privately and publicly they no longer want him to represent the star, what are his options? Let them know he’s going to stick his feet in the mud and be the biggest lockerroom distraction until they cut him? If the situation turns to unwant, there’s no way Dak would push to stay.

We are on a different page.

Yes, if Dallas says we are done with you and want to trade you, then he considers it and probably agrees.

But what did the NTC matter in that case?

They still have to run it run by him in some fashion first either way…because if another team wants to take on that salary and build around him, they would want to know that he wants to be there in advance.

It wouldn’t be a situation where he gets called into the FO and told he was traded out of nowhere.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

But what did the NTC matter in that case?

he gets to pick the team, like Russ did, like Mcnabb did, like Rodgers did. “I’ll waive it for this but not that”

 

[Aven8]

Get on the phone with Mike Tomlin and see how that convo goes.

 

[Bobhaze]

The term “No Trade Clause” is somewhat misleading. It is more like “Trade-able only if mutually agreed upon by ALL parties”. Dak could be traded if the Cowboys, Dak and the team accepting the trade were all in agreement. Not likely, but not impossible. Not likely because the Jones FO would never try it.

One other consideration - I think the Russell Wilson debacle in Denver makes a trade for Dak even less likely. Teams looking to trade for a QB have to give up a lot and the risks are high.

 

[CowboyChris]

suppose JJ informs Dak, that their will be no new contract, and grants Dak and his agent permission to seek a trade, how does that affect our salary cap? does the 59.5 million come due all at once?

 

[Jimbo123]

A trade = post June 1 cut.

Great, then Cooper Rush leads the Boys to a 5-12 record..BRILLIANT

 

[Creeper]

Of course a player can waive a no trade clause. But he can also veto any trade his team attempts to make. But why would Dak waive his no trade clause? What circumstances would cause him to do that? Guys who waive trade clauses generally have issues and want out of their current teams. t would be highly unusual for a player in Dak's position to waive his no trade clause.

 

[Coogiguy03]

I had a moment after saying this, I started cracking up non-stop. Some of the comments on here that people make about players has me cracking up in the same manner due to the creativity of the comment!!