Mazrimiv Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 There is no way CHI or WAS would have swapped #1 or #2 overall for Dak. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 1 hour ago, Mazrimiv said: There is no way CHI or WAS would have swapped #1 or #2 overall for Dak. Yup, no one would give up those picks for the rights to pay a guy at the top of the QB wage scale. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zycho32 Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 1 hour ago, Old Guy said: I think they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. They are stuck in quarterback purgatory. Good enough to win games and get in the playoffs, not good enough to win a Super Bowl. I have no clue what Jerry Jones will do. Probably extend him. I'm not 80 something years old. I'd probably come to grips with the idea Prescott is never getting me over the hump. If I could trade him this year and get a haul, I would. Reality, it's too late for that so you've screwed yourself either way. Should have traded him to the Bears for #1 overall. The Bears would have jumped at that opportunity. Even Washington for #2 overall. I think you'd only get Top 3 Overall picks in drafts where there are no sure-fire QB picks projected to go that high. I mean, maaaaaybe you could've conned Washington into it(though Dax is not a washed up Donovan McNabb and trading him to a division rival reeks of idiocy), but Chicago with Caleb Williams available? What else are you throwing in with that trade? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeresAGuy Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 Malik Wills traded to Packers for a 7th rounder. Championship. Jordan Love on the bubble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 Guess Malik can run and make off platform throws. Well we needed someone to come in that can get us out of a few games if necessary. Sounds like this kid might be able to do that. Going to take him awhile to get up to speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted August 27 Author Share Posted August 27 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted August 27 Share Posted August 27 If the NFL ran the telecom industry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilltray Posted August 27 Share Posted August 27 WR contracts are insane. I don't really think one elite guy matters much, compared to the depth of the unit. The thought that Lamb is worth 225% Christian McCaffrey is absolutely insane. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted August 27 Share Posted August 27 17 hours ago, Mazrimiv said: There is no way CHI or WAS would have swapped #1 or #2 overall for Dak. With what we know today, you are absolutely correct. Before the draft you have no idea if they would have or wouldn't have done that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted August 27 Share Posted August 27 6 minutes ago, spilltray said: WR contracts are insane. I don't really think one elite guy matters much, compared to the depth of the unit. The thought that Lamb is worth 225% Christian McCaffrey is absolutely insane. This will eventually catch up to those teams paying this ridiculous money to WRs. Imagine having Lamb at 34 a year average, Dak at 60 a year average and Parsons at likely 35 a year average. Close to 1/2 of your cap on an average per year of their contract to three players. I'm sort of surprised Demarcus Lawrence isn't trying to squeeze out one more deal. He's 32 and in last year of his deal too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R T Posted August 27 Share Posted August 27 17 hours ago, Old Guy said: Should have traded him to the Bears for #1 overall. The Bears would have jumped at that opportunity. Even Washington for #2 overall. 4 minutes ago, Old Guy said: With what we know today, you are absolutely correct. Before the draft you have no idea if they would have or wouldn't have done that. Yet you presented it as an absolute 17 hours ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted August 27 Share Posted August 27 (edited) 19 minutes ago, R T said: Yet you presented it as an absolute 17 hours ago. First of all, you continue to add nothing to the conversation. So, congratulations on your consistency. Second, I didn't change my opinion when I said, "you have no idea what they would have or wouldn't have done!" Why don't you try and add something to the forum rather than trying to play, 'gotcha,' all the time. It's rather childish. It certainly doesn't make you smarter than everybody. Back to ignore for you! Edited August 27 by Old Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted August 27 Share Posted August 27 9 minutes ago, Old Guy said: With what we know today, you are absolutely correct. Before the draft you have no idea if they would have or wouldn't have done that. Dak has a no-trade clause in his contract. Prior to any trade, CHI/WAS would need to get Dak to waive the no-trade clause. In other words, they would need to extend him at a number so high that he would agree to bypass hitting the UFA market next season in 2025. Saying I didn't know CHI/WAS would not have traded #1/#2 overall for Dak is like saying I didn't know they would not have traded those picks to GB straight up for pick #25. Those picks were a far more valuable asset than Dak. That was just as true before the draft as it is now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R T Posted August 27 Share Posted August 27 3 minutes ago, Old Guy said: First of all, you continue to add nothing to the conversation. So, congratulations on your consistency. Second, I didn't change my opinion when I said, "you have no idea what they would have or wouldn't have done!" Why don't you try and add something to the forum rather than trying to play, 'gotcha,' all the time. It's rather childish. It certainly doesn't make you smarter than everybody. Back to ignore for you! Doubtful you can even figure out where the ignore feature is at. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted August 27 Share Posted August 27 5 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: Dak has a no-trade clause in his contract. Prior to any trade, CHI/WAS would need to get Dak to waive the no-trade clause. In other words, they would need to extend him at a number so high that he would agree to bypass hitting the UFA market next season in 2025. Saying I didn't know CHI/WAS would not have traded #1/#2 overall for Dak is like saying I didn't know they would not have traded those picks to GB straight up for pick #25. Those picks were a far more valuable asset than Dak. That was just as true before the draft as it is now. That is simply semantics. The number back before the draft would be less than the number, he's getting next year or later this year. Chicago's desperation for a good quarterback, coupled with the enormous cap space they had make both of those things very doable. The Bears have missed badly on 4 first round quarterbacks in the past 25 years. They've never had a quarterback throw for 4000 yards. Prescott would have been the proverbial, 'bird in hand.' Not as familiar with Washington's situation cap wise. It didn't happen, it's a moot point. Dallas is screwed either way they go at this point. I dislike the Cowboys as most as much as the Bears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.