Dak Watch Thread...

[jsmith6919]

I really wish you were around when @Iamtdg started our revolution. Some of us still fight the good fight by refusing to give those inbred mouth-breathers our hard earned money, because hitting them in the wallet is the only thing they’ll notice. As long as fans keep selling out the stadium, their behavior won’t change.

You do recall we are finally rid of Garrett?

 

[boozeman]

Cowboys reportedly offer Dak Prescott richest contract in league history

Posted by Mike Florio on March 8, 2020, 10:07 AM EDT

The report doesn’t put it the way the above headline does, but when considering the value of contracts at the time the contracts are signed, that’s the clear implication.

Via Calvin Watkins of the Dallas Morning News, the Cowboys have offered quarterback Dak Prescott a contract with an average value of $33 million per year. Because Prescott currently has no contract, the so-called “new money” value of any deal he accepts will match the more practical assessment of a new contract: What that new contract is worth, from the moment it’s signed.

For Prescott, both numbers under the reported offer would be $33 million. For Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson‘s most recent deal, currently the richest in league history, the new money was $35 million per year. The total value at signing was $31.4 million per year.

Of course, the more important number comes from the amount of money that is truly and fully guaranteed at signing. Per Watkins, the offer to Prescott carries $105 million in guaranteed money generally. Which says nothing about signing bonus or other fully-guaranteed payments at the time the deal is signed.

Wilson has $107 million guaranteed in his deal, $70 million of which was guaranteed at signing. For Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers, the general guarantee was lower ($98.7 million), but the full guarantee at signing was higher ($79.2 million).

For Prescott’s deal, the devil will reside in details like signing bonus and fully-guaranteed salaries and fully-guaranteed roster bonuses and other fully-guaranteed payments. Regardless, an average value of $33 million would put him at the top of the all-time contractual stack.

Until Patrick Mahomes signs his new contract, of course.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Cowboys reportedly offer Dak Prescott richest contract in league history

Posted by Mike Florio on March 8, 2020, 10:07 AM EDT

The report doesn’t put it the way the above headline does, but when considering the value of contracts at the time the contracts are signed, that’s the clear implication.

Via Calvin Watkins of the Dallas Morning News, the Cowboys have offered quarterback Dak Prescott a contract with an average value of $33 million per year. Because Prescott currently has no contract, the so-called “new money” value of any deal he accepts will match the more practical assessment of a new contract: What that new contract is worth, from the moment it’s signed.

For Prescott, both numbers under the reported offer would be $33 million. For Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson‘s most recent deal, currently the richest in league history, the new money was $35 million per year. The total value at signing was $31.4 million per year.

Of course, the more important number comes from the amount of money that is truly and fully guaranteed at signing. Per Watkins, the offer to Prescott carries $105 million in guaranteed money generally. Which says nothing about signing bonus or other fully-guaranteed payments at the time the deal is signed.

Wilson has $107 million guaranteed in his deal, $70 million of which was guaranteed at signing. For Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers, the general guarantee was lower ($98.7 million), but the full guarantee at signing was higher ($79.2 million).

For Prescott’s deal, the devil will reside in details like signing bonus and fully-guaranteed salaries and fully-guaranteed roster bonuses and other fully-guaranteed payments. Regardless, an average value of $33 million would put him at the top of the all-time contractual stack.

Until Patrick Mahomes signs his new contract, of course.

Yeah if that was what was offered I have no idea why his agent thinks he will get more. Seems like a pretty great offer and a fair one.

 

[Cotton]

Yeah if that was what was offered I have no idea why his agent thinks he will get more. Seems like a pretty great offer and a fair one.

I keep telling you people it may not be the money per year that is the issue. It most likely is the length of contract. None of these report are giving the number of years that may have been offered. Dak may not want a 7 year contract and that may be the hangup if that's what they're offering him.

 

[Stasheroo]

I keep telling you people it may not be the money per year that is the issue. It most likely is the length of contract. None of these report are giving the number of years that may have been offered. Dak may not want a 7 year contract and that may be the hangup if that's what they're offering him.

I have to think it's length of contract too.

 

[p1_]

He prob wants 4 years

 

[Cotton]

He prob wants 4 years

And I don’t blame him. Why lock yourself into today’s market when 4 years from now you could make 10 mill more a year?

 

[ravidubey]

Dallas definitely wants a longer term.

Dak should stand firm on a four year deal

 

[boozeman]

Yeah if that was what was offered I have no idea why his agent thinks he will get more. Seems like a pretty great offer and a fair one.

What Goof Son calls an "honest offer". If I were him I would push for the shorter term because you know there will a shit ton more money down the road.

 

[Donpingon]

Dallas should be fine with a shorter offer. If Dak becomes a top 5 QB under McCarthy, great. If he doesn't, you move on

 

[Cowboysrock55]

And I don’t blame him. Why lock yourself into today’s market when 4 years from now you could make 10 mill more a year?

I mean that's kind of fair. Wentz got his 32 mil a year on a four year deal. I'd prefer a 7 to give us flexibility and so that hopefully down the road the contract can be a bit of a bargain. Plus we can shift some to future to free up cap space now. But I get why Dak would push for a shorter deal.

But if it's shorter no way in hell I guarantee 100+ mil. Should be more in the 60-70 range on a shorter deal like that.

 

[boozeman]

Dallas should be fine with a shorter offer. If Dak becomes a top 5 QB under McCarthy, great. If he doesn't, you move on

You would think that they do. But I don't believe so.

They have lived large off of the Tyron Smith deal, which was eight years.

Of the mega-deals they have signed lately, they are all pointing towards six years.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

You would think that they do. But I don't believe so.

They have lived large off of the Tyron Smith deal, which was eight years.

Of the mega-deals they have signed lately, they are all pointing towards six years.

They love the flexibility to rework those deals and create space. Shorter deals are much harder to do that with.

 

[1bigfan13]

Three years pay guaranteed. This is absurd.

What number would you be comfortable with the Cowboys paying Dak?

 

[Texas Ace]

If there were any truth to Miami being willing to part ways with both of their 1st rounders for Dak, I do it.

He's grown on me and I think we can win with him, but it's also hard to imagine paying him over 100 million.

I'd acquire those picks from Miami, make a run at Brady and if that failed, then I'd sign Phillip Rivers for 2 years and groom his replacement in the meantime.

I'd be willing to gamble on either Brady or Rivers having enough left in the tank to make a run with this team and this coaching staff.

I just think we've seen Dak's peak and I just wouldn't want to commit franchise QB money to him even though I wouldn't hate it if we did.

 

[L.T. Fan]

What number would you be comfortable with the Cowboys paying Dak?

I would pay him as most are players are paid. As long as he is on the roster he is under contract and plays. When or if he can no longer play or perform then his pay would be adjusted to what normal contracts do which is pay at the injured player does or if he is can no longer perform the his contractual arrangements cease. I’m just not a fan of the golden parachute arrangements . People shouldn’t have protection under contractual clauses that pays them if the do nothing.

If the owner wants to pay him tier one pay so be it but just don’t guaranteed money that isn’t earned.

 

[data]

I would pay him as most are players are paid. As long as he is on the roster he is under contract and plays. When or if he can no longer play or perform then his pay would be adjusted to what normal contracts do which is pay at the injured player does or if he is can no longer perform the his contractual arrangements cease. I’m just not a fan of the golden parachute arrangements . People shouldn’t have protection under contractual clauses that pays them if the do nothing.

If the owner wants to pay him tier one pay so be it but just don’t guaranteed money that isn’t earned.

As counterintuitive as it sounds, I don’t think the NFL wants this because league parity pays more.

If pay-for-performance, then top free agents and draft picks would avoid bottom dweller teams.

Dak Prescott doesn’t sign until Amari Cooper is signed and vice versa

 

[Cotton]

 

[Cotton]

With the franchise tag deadline coming Thursday, the Cowboys have sent a new proposal to the agent of Dak Prescott in hopes of kick-starting talks on a multi-year deal, according to a source. Russell Wilson ($35 million) and Ben Roethlisberger ($34 million) have the highest average salaries followed by Aaron Rodgers and Jared Goff ($33.5 million). The Cowboys’ new proposal would likely at least be in the Rodgers and Goff neighborhood, if not more, since Prescott’s side turned down $33 million.

Todd Archer, ESPN Staff Writer 6m ago

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Dallas should be fine with a shorter offer. If Dak becomes a top 5 QB under McCarthy, great. If he doesn't, you move on

This is kind of what I'm thinking from the team perspective. It is risky, but say you give him a three-year deal. If you don't win big in that time -- and it's going to be harder with the talent on this team getting older and getting paid -- fans will blame the QB whether it's justified or not. Even if he's pretty good, fans might be ready to try something else. And in that case the Joneses might want to also.

You run the risk that Dak is great and the team wins a title and he leaves, but then you could just pay up again and keep him if you wanted to.

It's a real shame that we didn't get to this point without Garrett in the picture. Things would be so much clearer if Dak had played at least a year with a decent coach. I guess that will happen if they end up franchising him.