Why Jerry is trying to sign Dak now

[Sydla]

No. They haven't executed their plan on whim and emotion. That you think that shows that you get your info from talking heads spewing their opinion rather than actually spending the time sifting through the BS.

They let Murray go at exactly the right time. 2015 happened because we had no QB and Dez was hurt. They let Dez go a year too late, but if you think that the Dallas Cowboys didn't understand that they needed a top flight X receiver, you're crazy. They don't grow on trees.

It's not the cap hit in Year 1, it's the cap hit in Year 3 you should be focusing on. At $25m, Dak will be in the middle of the pack in the middle of his contract. That's what we want.

You don't even realize how wrong you are.

I got this right from Stephen Jones' own mouth and Jerry's. Stephen said very clearly they didn't need a #1 type WR this past summer. He said that their analysis showed that they could work with spreading the ball around and a WR by committee approach. A few months later, they did a 180 and traded a 1st round pick for a #1 WR because their "plan" wasn't working. So yes, the Cowboys apparently didnt' understand they needed a top flight X receiver.

And you won't get an argument out of me that letting Murray walk was the right move. They should have let him walk. But the point is the "plan" that came right out of Jerry's and Stephen's mouth was that they wouldn't invest a lot in the RB position because their analysis showed that RBS get hurt more often, break down more often and that putting valuable resources into the position might mean you wont get the return on those assets.

And then a year later they use a premium asset on a TB because Randall didn't work out like they thought.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Even if you throw the Bengals in there we have to consider the draft order for 2019. The first 4 picks don't need a QB. We don't know what Tampa will do. You have the Giants and Jags after that. I think they'd probably draft a rookie over breaking the bank on Dak. Then you have the Lions and Buffalo. Then Denver and Cincinnati. I don't know how deep the draft will be for QBs, but I know teams looking to pay Dak 25+ Mil a year is very limited. Maybe non existent.

I could see Denver really giving Dak a go. Though, he's not a FA until next season, so QB needs could change.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

And teams using that logic end up paying for their mistakes - Bortles, Cousins, etc.

Make sure Dak is closer to the Rodgers and Brees and other top level QBs than the middle of the pack QBs before you hand him one massive check. That's all I am saying.

Sure, but you won't be able to tell that after this year, and likely not the next, the Rodgers/Brees level is pretty lofty. If you don't pay him this year, if he improves next year either you'll have to pay him $28-30 mil a year, or you lose him just after he starts to get really good.

I understand what you're saying, don't get me wrong. It's a crap shoot, hold off and take the chance of losing him or having to pay a lot more than you can get him for now, or pay him the big bucks and hope like heck he is the "real deal".

You pays your money and you takes your chance....

 

[LACowboysFan1]

You don't even realize how wrong you are.

I got this right from Stephen Jones' own mouth and Jerry's. Stephen said very clearly they didn't need a #1 type WR this past summer. He said that their analysis showed that they could work with spreading the ball around and a WR by committee approach. A few months later, they did a 180 and traded a 1st round pick for a #1 WR because their "plan" wasn't working. So yes, the Cowboys apparently didnt' understand they needed a top flight X receiver.

And you won't get an argument out of me that letting Murray walk was the right move. They should have let him walk. But the point is the "plan" that came right out of Jerry's and Stephen's mouth was that they wouldn't invest a lot in the RB position because their analysis showed that RBS get hurt more often, break down more often and that putting valuable resources into the position might mean you wont get the return on those assets.

And then a year later they use a premium asset on a TB because Randall didn't work out like they thought.

Only thing is, you can't take what Jerry and Stephen say as gospel. Jerry said he wouldn't make a mid year change, then fired Wade after 7 games. So what they say is not necessarily what they were thinking...

 

[sunalsorises]

Sure, but you won't be able to tell that after this year, and likely not the next, the Rodgers/Brees level is pretty lofty. If you don't pay him this year, if he improves next year either you'll have to pay him $28-30 mil a year, or you lose him just after he starts to get really good.

I understand what you're saying, don't get me wrong. It's a crap shoot, hold off and take the chance of losing him or having to pay a lot more than you can get him for now, or pay him the big bucks and hope like heck he is the "real deal".

You pays your money and you takes your chance....

That's the boat Dallas is in. Technically, they could still draft a QB high and make a move if Dak regresses/doesn't improve. They'd have a rookie QB on a rookie deal and be paying Dak starter money which is the model they had when Dak started over Romo. It would be a lot of money dedicated to the QB position but in reverse of what it normally would be with the backup making starter money and vice versa. It's not ideal but it could be done.

 

[Flamma]

I could see Denver really giving Dak a go. Though, he's not a FA until next season, so QB needs could change.

Even so, what is the competition? No matter how much I like a product, if no one else needs them or wants them, what do you expect I'll pay? The answer is not much. I think Dak is a solid QB given the opportunity and team around him. He is by no means an elite QB. He's half Tony Romo at his best. So the question is, what do you pay a solid QB that is not elite? You can't go by the Jags or Minnesota because they are seen as mistakes. I'm thinking 15-20 a year for Dak or let him walk. He's not getting better than that. He needs to show consistency before that happens.

 

[LovinItAll]

You don't even realize how wrong you are.

I got this right from Stephen Jones' own mouth and Jerry's. Stephen said very clearly they didn't need a #1 type WR this past summer. He said that their analysis showed that they could work with spreading the ball around and a WR by committee approach. A few months later, they did a 180 and traded a 1st round pick for a #1 WR because their "plan" wasn't working. So yes, the Cowboys apparently didnt' understand they needed a top flight X receiver.

And you won't get an argument out of me that letting Murray walk was the right move. They should have let him walk. But the point is the "plan" that came right out of Jerry's and Stephen's mouth was that they wouldn't invest a lot in the RB position because their analysis showed that RBS get hurt more often, break down more often and that putting valuable resources into the position might mean you wont get the return on those assets.

And then a year later they use a premium asset on a TB because Randall didn't work out like they thought.

Again, you're confusing public statements with private sentiment. What did you want the Jones' to say? 'We don't have an X receiver and we're screwed.'?

Use your head, man.

 

[Sydla]

Sure, but you won't be able to tell that after this year, and likely not the next, the Rodgers/Brees level is pretty lofty. If you don't pay him this year, if he improves next year either you'll have to pay him $28-30 mil a year, or you lose him just after he starts to get really good.

I understand what you're saying, don't get me wrong. It's a crap shoot, hold off and take the chance of losing him or having to pay a lot more than you can get him for now, or pay him the big bucks and hope like heck he is the "real deal".

You pays your money and you takes your chance....

It's the risk I am willing to take.

If he blows up and I have to pay him $28MM instead of $22MM a year, then so be it.

 

[Sydla]

Again, you're confusing public statements with private sentiment. What did you want the Jones' to say? 'We don't have an X receiver and we're screwed.'?

Use your head, man.

The excuse making continues.

It was pretty damn clear from their statements this summer that they thought what they had at WR was good enough.

 

[Sydla]

Only thing is, you can't take what Jerry and Stephen say as gospel. Jerry said he wouldn't make a mid year change, then fired Wade after 7 games. So what they say is not necessarily what they were thinking...

But that supports my point. They don't ever really have a plan. They just fire from the hip.

It was pretty clear that they thought they could build a competent offense around the fact they were going with a WR by committee approach. They miscalculated and admitted their mistake when they traded for Cooper.

This front office does some good things for sure, but their "plans" often shift and sometimes very quickly. It's one of the flaws of this set up where the owner, who has no one to answer to, can make personnel decisions.

 

[cern]

The Skins and Cousins' situation is entirely different than what we have here. There were issues between the front office and Cousins and some issues in the locker room with him on top of them wanting him to prove himself. To my knowledge, there are no such issues here in Dallas.

The Raiders didn't "lose" Mack. The simply didn't want to pay him long term so they tagged him and then when it was clear he wouldn't accept what they wanted to pay him, they traded him.

These are apples to oranges comparisons

Plus there are examples of people who were tagged that still eventually signed long term with that team. Using your logic, there's no way Lawrence would sign here after being tagged.

that's not my logic speaking. that's your illogic. please don't misquote me in order to prove your position. just speak your own thoughts.

 

[cern]

23rd ranked passing is a hot commodity huh

you do have to factor his receiving corps thru the 3-5 stretch as well as the offensive (very) line body of work. then throw in the coaching of the hc and oc and he can be given a few points. judge him from 3-5 to 7-1 the final half of the season. he looks a lot better during that stretch. and the aforementioned detriments were somewhat corrected by changed to the o-line and the addition of cooper.

 

[Sydla]

that's not my logic speaking. that's your illogic. please don't misquote me in order to prove your position. just speak your own thoughts.

What did I misquote? Your entire premise is that tagging him could/would lead to a poor situation and then cited Washington, Pittsburgh and Oakland as proof.

Despite the fact that each of those situations is different than Dak's and despite the fact that other players have been tagged and then resigned eventually.

 

[LACowboysFan1]

It's the risk I am willing to take.

If he blows up and I have to pay him $28MM instead of $22MM a year, then so be it.

Don't think JJ has that view, but with JJ, who knows?

 

[JW82]

You specifically said Carter and Brady were always being compared, and you can't deny that people write a lot of really stupid things on this board. Without knowing you, how would I determine what you actually believe, without , , or even ?

Fair. Basic sarcasm.

 

[Sydla]

Don't think JJ has that view, but with JJ, who knows?

Agreed, I don't think he has that view at all. I think he wants to try to get him signed sooner rather than later.

But frankly, Jerry/Stephen decision making doesn't necessarily give me the warm and fuzzies.

All I am saying is that if I were in charge, I'd rather have to pay a bit more later after I have a better idea of what Dak is then try to get him cheaper today but still have to pay a crap ton of money for him without truly knowing if he's that upper echelon, elite QB.

 

[GenoT]

TO BE CLEAR...my prediction (same as it was in preseason) is that the Cowboys — at the very least — make the NFC Champ game.

However, and ONLY for argument’s sake, suppose the offense does a Colts 2.0 vs Seattle?

What might be Dak’s extension offer then?

 

[cern]

It's the risk I am willing to take.

If he blows up and I have to pay him $28MM instead of $22MM a year, then so be it.

it's nice to see how cavalier you are with jerry's money. how easily dismissive you are about a mere 6 million a year. that's what i'd prefer we prevent by signing him now. we'll just have to wait until the offseason an see how it goes. could go your way. could go mine.

 

[JReed1000]

You do realize the offense was 23rd in Passing Yards because it was only 21st in Passing Attempts, right?

Just like the Cowboys running game was number 10 in Rushing Yards because they were number 10 in Rushing Attempts.

Generally speaking, more passing attempts typically leads to more passing yards and more rushing attempts lead to more rushing yards. Amazing how that works, right?

Tell the Truth...Shame the Devil

 

[Sydla]

it's nice to see how cavalier you are with jerry's money. how easily dismissive you are about a mere 6 million a year. that's what i'd prefer we prevent by signing him now. we'll just have to wait until the offseason an see how it goes. could go your way. could go mine.

The difference here is that you think there is no downside here. Dak is great and only will get better. So pay him now, save a few million a year and it's a massive win.

I don't see it that way because I am not sure we still really know what we have in Dak. So in that sense, I'd rather wait it out, see what you really have and if that costs you a few million more, then so be it. It's the prudent angle for me because I'd rather be saddled paying him a few million more by waiting than find yourself in a situation where after 2020, you are staring at $60MM+ in guaranteed money and cap hits tied to a QB who is just an average, maybe decent QB.