Jump to content

Dak Thread....still debating, beating a dead horse


WizardHawk

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, JWingate said:

Ok so that tells me you don't have an answer. You can say don't spend the money, but you can't say what you would do to solidify the most important position on the team. There isn't a player out there you can get cheaper and plays better and there is a reason for that. 

There’s a subsection of fans who think the cap implication of signing a big-time QB contract is a bigger impediment to winning football games than having no answer at the position at all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Nextyearfordaboyz said:

There’s a subsection of fans who think the cap implication of signing a big-time QB contract is a bigger impediment to winning football games than having no answer at the position at all.

The cap is imaginary. Teams manipulate it all the time. We just have a front office who suddenly has decided to be stingy...unless it comes to giving $90MM to a RB or a lucrative extension to a LB who can't tackle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, plan9misfit said:

You asked for a QB who was better and cheaper. I gave you one.

You do realize WE WOULD MOST LIKELY HAVE DONE WORSE with BRADY as our QB for the full season last year. Not that it matters as no way would he come here with Dak as the tagged starting QB. 

Brady is the best quarterback ever to play the game but he is not capable of winning by himself any more. Last year he couldn't get out of the first round this year he won, but he was a add on to the TB defense. You do remember him throwing 3 interceptions in the NFC championship game right...      

I frankly have zero answers on what to do. I do think adding a 40 plus year old QB who was let go by the team he won 6 super bowls with was not the long term answer. The only starting QB out their I want over Dak are Wilson, Mahomes, and Allen. I would accept Stafford, Herbert, Rogers and Watson as Dak's replacement. Wilson and Rogers would cost less then Dak but good luck trading for them. uh Stafford and Watson costs about the same but would cost us more in picks.  Allen - Herbert would cost us more then Dak.   I want NOTHING to do with a Rookie this draft class. Though yes most likely two or three rook's from this class will be the next Allen or Herbert but which ones...

SO basically we are in deep dudu either way because our leadership was short sided and didn't sign Dak when we could have had him 5 years 35-36 M  the year before we offered him the tag.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, D82 said:

The cap is imaginary. Teams manipulate it all the time. We just have a front office who suddenly has decided to be stingy...unless it comes to giving $90MM to a RB or a lucrative extension to a LB who can't tackle. 

The saints are the first team im seeing being actually negatively impacted. 

Frankly that's a team im calling about trading picks for players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Texas_OutLaw7 said:

The saints are the first team im seeing being actually negatively impacted. 

Frankly that's a team im calling about trading picks for players. 

And, it’s not really all on them either. Their cap number is significantly less thanks to current state of country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nextyearfordaboyz said:

There’s a subsection of fans who think the cap implication of signing a big-time QB contract is a bigger impediment to winning football games than having no answer at the position at all.

I don’t consider our current QB to be much of an answer, so I’d roll the dice with the unknown commodity, thank you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Nextyearfordaboyz said:

There’s a subsection of fans who think the cap implication of signing a big-time QB contract is a bigger impediment to winning football games than having no answer at the position at all.

And they are correct.  Unless the QB is a HOFer, nfl teams almost never get a decent return on paying a “good” QB great QB money.  In fact, teams do better with QBs on their rookie deals than good QBs on their second contract.  This year, like the 5 years before prove that the very best teams in the nfl either have a HOF QB or a QB on their rookie deal.  We now see teams desperately dumping their overpriced QBs on their second contract.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, The_Slamman said:

And they are correct.  Unless the QB is a HOFer, nfl teams almost never get a decent return on paying a “good” QB great QB money.  In fact, teams do better with QBs on their rookie deals than good QBs on their second contract.  This year, like the 5 years before prove that the very best teams in the nfl either have a HOF QB or a QB on their rookie deal.  We now see teams desperately dumping their overpriced QBs on their second contract.  

Exactly. If you don’t have a QB truly worthy of a massive contract, then you should move on from that QB. People keep talking about “progress stoppers” at other positions while thinking that mediocre QBs don’t fall into that same category. Except they do, and they’re 2-3 times more expensive, which absolutely impacts the salary cap, whether the cap apologists want to admit it or not.

I still laugh at people who are screaming about Zeke and Amari’s contracts being “too much” based on average production and the negative impacts they have with respect to signing free agents and extending other players (because the team doesn’t have the money), yet they’re more than happy to pay more than double that to a mediocre QB.

Derp.

Edited by plan9misfit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, The_Slamman said:

And they are correct.  Unless the QB is a HOFer, nfl teams almost never get a decent return on paying a “good” QB great QB money.  In fact, teams do better with QBs on their rookie deals than good QBs on their second contract.  This year, like the 5 years before prove that the very best teams in the nfl either have a HOF QB or a QB on their rookie deal.  We now see teams desperately dumping their overpriced QBs on their second contract.  

While I do not disagree with the premise of this statement at all, what I find interesting is how you define "HOF" QB.   

1st we have Brady, Wilson and Mahomes. They were shown to be HOF's by their THIRD year in the NFL or there abouts.  I would include Payton Manning and maybe Big Ben in this list to go father back in history.  Other HOF's such as Rogers an Brees were not really considered "HOF" tell mid career when the first WON a super bowl. Thus it is a little hyperbola to say either you want a HOF QB or a rook as a lot of times those QB's you desire who are HOF's developed into HOF's on their "second deal" like Rogers and Brees.  And also to say you want a Rook on first deal, unless you luck into Mahomes, your really out of luck. Remember on that list of above.. Brady an Wilson were late round pics, Rogers sat for ever, Mahomes sat watching a super bowl contender play as did Brady.  Brees was traded, Manning and maybe Big Ben were the only ones who were almost garmented to make it when they were drafted.  

NOW time will tell about Allen and Herbert the top of the list of current "rooks", right now Allen has a the best chance of winning a super bowl on his rookie deal but I don't give him good odds. 

So what does this say.. in the past 20-25 years in all the 1st round QB's taken you have 2 that turned into instant HOF QB's by year 3 or Rookie contract -  Payton Manning-  Mahomes. THAT to me is not the odds I want, and the odds of getting a Rogers, Brees who turned into HOF QB's by their second deal are just as good.  Big Ben is the outlier. He is a HOF QB, and won a super bowl early but I don't see him earning his HOF QB status until he was on his second deal.   STill you count him and that's 3 in 20 plus years....  OUCH....  which is what a lot of fans here want...  

I want us to keep a guy who is showing to be in the mold close to say a Brees or even Rogers when you consider how long Rogers sat "learning" before playing then rolling the dice and starting over. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hate to double post but want to address the contract issue.

Personally I have no problem with Coop's contract,  I DO have and had major concerns about Zeke's contract mostly because rarely are RB's as dominate on their second contract.  You see to me the Zeke situation is the major sign of just how bad our management is at dealing with contracts and it's personal.   Even going back to Smith.. huh one of the few who was dominate on his second contract.  Management has always seemed ill prepared in what to do.   Jones especially is just too wishy washy.   YOU EITHER SIGN YOUR GUY before hand or DRAFT HIS REPLACEMENT and let him go.   IF you didn't really want to PAY ZEKE the money then make that decision and follow through with out penalizing the team.   Jones let ZEKE drive the train, Jones should have either did redid Zeke's contract off season or AQUIRED his replacement off season. To leave things in limbo was just dumb. Gave Zeke the advantage, when he held out which should have been expected the team was not ready to deal with not having him around and JONES was forced to cave in.   IN some ways he has done the same with DAK. This situation needed to have been resolved two years ago. I say the situation with Wentz and Goff actually prove that. By getting Wentz and Goff signed early those teams were able to put them selves in the position of having a out. Rams were able to trade Goff because he was already signed to a deal that was manageable by his next team. Philly and Houston for that matter can also figure out a way to trade their QB"s and still get something in return. WE are in the position of either signing or tagging  DAK versus getting ZERO in return. 

Also just a side note about signing QB's to second big deals never working. Rogers signed a deal making him the 5th highest QB in the NFL three years after he was drafted and before he had even PLAYED a complete season. Rogers went 6-10 that year as a fourth year player...   he did not win the super bowl until his 6th year in the NFL.  I am not saying Dak is Rogers, mostly I think Dak is more like Big Ben but what I am saying is you can not worry about salary cap when you consider your QB. Also through the years one thing is certain, there is not guarantee's on what works in regards to your QB and what doesn't THERE is NO BLUE PRINT written in STONE.   

Edited by quiller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2021 at 11:19 AM, D82 said:

The cap is imaginary. Teams manipulate it all the time. We just have a front office who suddenly has decided to be stingy...unless it comes to giving $90MM to a RB or a lucrative extension to a LB who can't tackle. 

Riiiiight.  So, we imaginarily can’t re-sign Good players because of this imaginary cap.  Makes perfect sense.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The_Slamman said:

Riiiiight.  So, we imaginarily can’t re-sign Good players because of this imaginary cap.  Makes perfect sense.  

Who haven't we been able to re-sign? Jones? They could have done that too but chose not to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, quiller said:

hate to double post but want to address the contract issue.

Personally I have no problem with Coop's contract,  I DO have and had major concerns about Zeke's contract mostly because rarely are RB's as dominate on their second contract.  You see to me the Zeke situation is the major sign of just how bad our management is at dealing with contracts and it's personal.   Even going back to Smith.. huh one of the few who was dominate on his second contract.  Management has always seemed ill prepared in what to do.   Jones especially is just too wishy washy.   YOU EITHER SIGN YOUR GUY before hand or DRAFT HIS REPLACEMENT and let him go.   IF you didn't really want to PAY ZEKE the money then make that decision and follow through with out penalizing the team.   Jones let ZEKE drive the train, Jones should have either did redid Zeke's contract off season or AQUIRED his replacement off season. To leave things in limbo was just dumb. Gave Zeke the advantage, when he held out which should have been expected the team was not ready to deal with not having him around and JONES was forced to cave in.   IN some ways he has done the same with DAK. This situation needed to have been resolved two years ago. I say the situation with Wentz and Goff actually prove that. By getting Wentz and Goff signed early those teams were able to put them selves in the position of having a out. Rams were able to trade Goff because he was already signed to a deal that was manageable by his next team. Philly and Houston for that matter can also figure out a way to trade their QB"s and still get something in return. WE are in the position of either signing or tagging  DAK versus getting ZERO in return. 

Also just a side note about signing QB's to second big deals never working. Rogers signed a deal making him the 5th highest QB in the NFL three years after he was drafted and before he had even PLAYED a complete season. Rogers went 6-10 that year as a fourth year player...   he did not win the super bowl until his 6th year in the NFL.  I am not saying Dak is Rogers, mostly I think Dak is more like Big Ben but what I am saying is you can not worry about salary cap when you consider your QB. Also through the years one thing is certain, there is not guarantee's on what works in regards to your QB and what doesn't THERE is NO BLUE PRINT written in STONE.   

First, our QB is nothing like Roethlisberger. Not even close. Second, BOTH of Roethlisberger’s Super Bowl wins were when he was on his rookie contract. As soon as he was paid serious money when his extension kicked in the following season, they only made the AFC Championship Game one more time, in 2010. After that? Nothing. So yes, there is a blueprint that we’re seeing, and it isn’t but around QBs getting 20+% of the cap. Rather, it’s when they’re still on the cheap, so the organization can field a full team of talent around him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, plan9misfit said:

First, our QB is nothing like Roethlisberger. Not even close. Second, BOTH of Roethlisberger’s Super Bowl wins were when he was on his rookie contract. As soon as he was paid serious money when his extension kicked in the following season, they only made the AFC Championship Game one more time, in 2010. After that? Nothing. So yes, there is a blueprint that we’re seeing, and it isn’t but around QBs getting 20+% of the cap. Rather, it’s when they’re still on the cheap, so the organization can field a full team of talent around him.

I still believe Dak's development as a QB is more like Ben then any other. AND YES I know DAK has zero super bowl wins.   I JUST DO NOT AGREE about this only winning with QB on the cheap deals is the best way.  My list had all the rookie deal winners. Brady and Wilson not 1st rounders ..   Mahomes yes..  Big Ben yes  the Mannings yes  and Flacco. 

who won on second contracts..   Brady - the Mannings - Brees - Rogers and Big Ben. 

so 6 QB's on Rookie contracts won super bowls and  6 QB's won on second contract. 

and 1 back up Qb has also won. 

that is mostly how it went in the past what 17 or so years. 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...