Dak Prescott thread

Moderator: bwgood77

bluejerseyjinx
RealGM
Posts: 16,666
And1: 3,364
Joined: Oct 18, 2014
Location: Maine
       

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#61 » by bluejerseyjinx » Wed Dec 27, 2023 1:03 am

Micah Prescott wrote:Here are all the QBs we could have drafted in 2021 instead of giving Dak his contract and taking Parsons -

Mac Jones
Kyle Trask
Kellen Mond
Davis Mills
Ian Book
Sam Ehlinger

:lol:


THIS is what you are eager to jump into

We saw this team without Dak the year he was injured...we SUCKED...he isn't the problem, the TEAM is

There you go again. :falloff: :falloff: :falloff: You had to go back 3 years ago to find an excuse on why your boy hasn't got it done the past 2 years. Great argument. Your digging a deeper hole for yourself. :D
Mariner
Senior
Posts: 578
And1: 108
Joined: Jul 21, 2023

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#62 » by Mariner » Wed Dec 27, 2023 1:30 am

I guess this is the times we live in.
Either you’re the goat or you are garbage. Nothing in between.
Dak isn’t great. But he was a great 4th round pick that gave us low cost years. Even his 40 million a year contract aged well.
We can move on without hate. He’s a good QB with great character. ( man of the year award ) The cowboys barely used any draft capital on him and the monetary cost wasn’t high for the most part.
Dak has proven he can get the 1 seed and win and home. It just hasn’t worked out.
If Dak did play for another team next year I would still cheer for him. ( assuming he’s not playing Dallas )
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Analyst
Posts: 3,504
And1: 1,200
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#63 » by Micah Prescott » Wed Dec 27, 2023 1:58 am

Cactus Jack wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:Here are all the QBs we could have drafted in 2021 instead of giving Dak his contract and taking Parsons -

Mac Jones
Kyle Trask
Kellen Mond
Davis Mills
Ian Book
Sam Ehlinger

:lol:


THIS is what you are eager to jump into

We saw this team without Dak the year he was injured...we SUCKED...he isn't the problem, the TEAM is

2021 was not a good time to take a QB. That's obvious.

This upcoming draft is much better for QB's. So, if you're going to do it, now would be the time to cut bait.


Our first pick will be mid 20s, there is no draft where it's easy to hit on a QB that late. Even taking a QB early is hard to hit.

It is really hard just to find a top-10 QB....the idea that we can easily upgrade Dak is short sighted.
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Analyst
Posts: 3,504
And1: 1,200
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#64 » by Micah Prescott » Wed Dec 27, 2023 2:12 am

2000: (11) / Randall Cunningham (3) / Anthony Wright (2)
2001: Quincy Carter (8) / Anthony Wright (3) / Ryan Leaf (3) / Clint Stoerner (2)
2002: Chad Hutchinson (9) / Quincy Carter (7)
2003: Quincy Carter (16)
2004: Vinny Testaverde (15) / Drew Henson (1)
2005: Drew Bledsoe (16)


^^^ All the starting QBs we went through after Aikman retired before we finally found someone decent in Romo

SIX WASTED SEASONS

Most likely this will be what we go through post Dak.

Sure it's possible we just magically luck into the next Mahomes, but it's HIGHLY unlikely
Mariner
Senior
Posts: 578
And1: 108
Joined: Jul 21, 2023

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#65 » by Mariner » Wed Dec 27, 2023 2:15 am

Micah Prescott wrote:2000: (11) / Randall Cunningham (3) / Anthony Wright (2)
2001: Quincy Carter (8) / Anthony Wright (3) / Ryan Leaf (3) / Clint Stoerner (2)
2002: Chad Hutchinson (9) / Quincy Carter (7)
2003: Quincy Carter (16)
2004: Vinny Testaverde (15) / Drew Henson (1)
2005: Drew Bledsoe (16)


^^^ All the starting QBs we went through after Aikman retired before we finally found someone decent in Romo

SIX WASTED SEASONS

Most likely this will be what we go through post Dak.

Sure it's possible we just magically luck into the next Mahomes, but it's HIGHLY unlikely


To be fair we are a much better at drafting now with Will McClay.
User avatar
Cactus Jack
Forum Mod - Supersonics
Forum Mod - Supersonics
Posts: 28,215
And1: 14,507
Joined: Feb 25, 2015
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#66 » by Cactus Jack » Wed Dec 27, 2023 2:17 am

Micah Prescott wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:Here are all the QBs we could have drafted in 2021 instead of giving Dak his contract and taking Parsons -

Mac Jones
Kyle Trask
Kellen Mond
Davis Mills
Ian Book
Sam Ehlinger

:lol:


THIS is what you are eager to jump into

We saw this team without Dak the year he was injured...we SUCKED...he isn't the problem, the TEAM is

2021 was not a good time to take a QB. That's obvious.

This upcoming draft is much better for QB's. So, if you're going to do it, now would be the time to cut bait.


Our first pick will be mid 20s, there is no draft where it's easy to hit on a QB that late. Even taking a QB early is hard to hit.

It is really hard just to find a top-10 QB....the idea that we can easily upgrade Dak is short sighted.

Maybe you don't upgrade. But it's worth a shot. Plus, you would potentially save a bunch of money towards the cap that could be used on other areas to upgrade the team. The Cowboys already have a very good roster. Save the money & put it towards positions that need to be improved.
Dominater wrote:Damn Cactus jack takin over
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Analyst
Posts: 3,504
And1: 1,200
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#67 » by Micah Prescott » Wed Dec 27, 2023 2:22 am

Cactus Jack wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:2021 was not a good time to take a QB. That's obvious.

This upcoming draft is much better for QB's. So, if you're going to do it, now would be the time to cut bait.


Our first pick will be mid 20s, there is no draft where it's easy to hit on a QB that late. Even taking a QB early is hard to hit.

It is really hard just to find a top-10 QB....the idea that we can easily upgrade Dak is short sighted.

Maybe you don't upgrade. But it's worth a shot. Plus, you would potentially save a bunch of money towards the cap that could be used on other areas to upgrade the team.

Disagree

Dak leads the NFL in TD passes, he isn't the problem.

Also this convo is pure hypothetical because there is a 99% chance he's getting an extension. They are still a playoff team and he was just in the MVP running. He's not walking, no way they go that route.
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Analyst
Posts: 3,504
And1: 1,200
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#68 » by Micah Prescott » Wed Dec 27, 2023 2:25 am

Mariner wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:2000: (11) / Randall Cunningham (3) / Anthony Wright (2)
2001: Quincy Carter (8) / Anthony Wright (3) / Ryan Leaf (3) / Clint Stoerner (2)
2002: Chad Hutchinson (9) / Quincy Carter (7)
2003: Quincy Carter (16)
2004: Vinny Testaverde (15) / Drew Henson (1)
2005: Drew Bledsoe (16)


^^^ All the starting QBs we went through after Aikman retired before we finally found someone decent in Romo

SIX WASTED SEASONS

Most likely this will be what we go through post Dak.

Sure it's possible we just magically luck into the next Mahomes, but it's HIGHLY unlikely


To be fair we are a much better at drafting now with Will McClay.

He was the lead scout when we took Dak, and Dak wasn't our first choice, we wanted Paxton Lynch who was a bust. We got lucky.
User avatar
Cactus Jack
Forum Mod - Supersonics
Forum Mod - Supersonics
Posts: 28,215
And1: 14,507
Joined: Feb 25, 2015
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#69 » by Cactus Jack » Wed Dec 27, 2023 2:42 am

Micah Prescott wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:
Our first pick will be mid 20s, there is no draft where it's easy to hit on a QB that late. Even taking a QB early is hard to hit.

It is really hard just to find a top-10 QB....the idea that we can easily upgrade Dak is short sighted.

Maybe you don't upgrade. But it's worth a shot. Plus, you would potentially save a bunch of money towards the cap that could be used on other areas to upgrade the team.

Disagree

Dak leads the NFL in TD passes, he isn't the problem.

Also this convo is pure hypothetical because they're is a 99% chance he's getting an extension. They are still a playoff team and he was just in the MVP running. He's not walking, no way they go that route.

I get it.

But if you pay Dak, the roster around him won't improve. So if you can't get over the hump now, what's the point?

Dak's contract hasn't been too much of an issue yet. That's largely because they've hit big on a few guys in the draft. Parsons has been a game changer for them. But he's going to get paid soon. Both he & Lamb will be up for extensions within a year or so. Which will make the margins even more difficult. That's the downside to paying a QB market value.

Those three guys alone will take up a huge chunk of your cap. Sometimes the math just doesn't add up. :wink:

It really doesn't make logical sense to pay a guy unless he's absolutely irreplaceable. Dak isn't that guy. You're fooling yourself if you think otherwise.
Dominater wrote:Damn Cactus jack takin over
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Analyst
Posts: 3,504
And1: 1,200
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#70 » by Micah Prescott » Wed Dec 27, 2023 4:29 am

Cactus Jack wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:
Cactus Jack wrote:Maybe you don't upgrade. But it's worth a shot. Plus, you would potentially save a bunch of money towards the cap that could be used on other areas to upgrade the team.

Disagree

Dak leads the NFL in TD passes, he isn't the problem.

Also this convo is pure hypothetical because they're is a 99% chance he's getting an extension. They are still a playoff team and he was just in the MVP running. He's not walking, no way they go that route.

I get it.

But if you pay Dak, the roster around him won't improve. So if you can't get over the hump now, what's the point?

Dak's contract hasn't been too much of an issue yet. That's largely because they've hit big on a few guys in the draft. Parsons has been a game changer for them. But he's going to get paid soon. Both he & Lamb will be up for extensions within a year or so. Which will make the margins even more difficult. That's the downside to paying a QB market value.

Those three guys alone will take up a huge chunk of your cap. Sometimes the math just doesn't add up. :wink:

It really doesn't make logical sense to pay a guy unless he's absolutely irreplaceable. Dak isn't that guy. You're fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

Under this discrepancy only Mahomes is "that guy". He is the only QB who is "irreplaceable".

But as long as we are a playoff contender I disagree with any major changes. As long as we are a playoff contender we have a chance imo.

I just witnessed my Rangers win a WS going into the playoffs as major underdogs, unable to beat "good teams" before the playoffs started.

And that is MLB where they have to play a full series. In the NFL it is "Any Given Sunday" where even Nick Foles has a shot at getting hot.
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Analyst
Posts: 3,504
And1: 1,200
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#71 » by Micah Prescott » Wed Dec 27, 2023 4:37 am

Let's say Dallas has Dak for 5 more years and all 5 of those years we are a playoff team. This is a likely scenario IMO.

I think odds are that at least one of those 5 years we'll finally go deep.

I'll take my chances with that vs starting over at QB, the never ending search for "the one"
User avatar
Cactus Jack
Forum Mod - Supersonics
Forum Mod - Supersonics
Posts: 28,215
And1: 14,507
Joined: Feb 25, 2015
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#72 » by Cactus Jack » Wed Dec 27, 2023 5:46 am

Micah Prescott wrote:Under this discrepancy only Mahomes is "that guy". He is the only QB who is "irreplaceable".

But as long as we are a playoff contender I disagree with any major changes. As long as we are a playoff contender we have a chance imo.

I just witnessed my Rangers win a WS going into the playoffs as major underdogs, unable to beat "good teams" before the playoffs started.

And that is MLB where they have to play a full series. In the NFL it is "Any Given Sunday" where even Nick Foles has a shot at getting hot.

Brady was that guy. Mahomes, Rodgers. I would even include Lamar as part of that conversation. As there just isn't anyone like him. But in most cases, it doesn't pencil out.

The Eagles won with Foles in large part because Carson Wentz was still on his rookie deal. They didn't have a QB who was making a lot of money. Same deal with Hurts. But that's going to change over time. It's already starting to show currently, as their depth isn't what it was last season. That's just the reality of the cap. Players get paid & move on.

MLB doesn't have a cap in place. So, the two sports are very different in that regard.
Dominater wrote:Damn Cactus jack takin over
Mr B
RealGM
Posts: 14,551
And1: 4,154
Joined: Nov 20, 2014
         

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#73 » by Mr B » Wed Dec 27, 2023 6:30 am

Micah Prescott wrote:2000: (11) / Randall Cunningham (3) / Anthony Wright (2)
2001: Quincy Carter (8) / Anthony Wright (3) / Ryan Leaf (3) / Clint Stoerner (2)
2002: Chad Hutchinson (9) / Quincy Carter (7)
2003: Quincy Carter (16)
2004: Vinny Testaverde (15) / Drew Henson (1)
2005: Drew Bledsoe (16)


^^^ All the starting QBs we went through after Aikman retired before we finally found someone decent in Romo

SIX WASTED SEASONS

Most likely this will be what we go through post Dak.

Sure it's possible we just magically luck into the next Mahomes, but it's HIGHLY unlikely


Are you sure you really follow the Cowboys and not trolling us? I mentioned Will McClay before and you seem as if you have no idea who he is or his track record for drafting. He’s been a prominent voice in the draft room (he now runs the Cowboys draft) since 2013. Since then they’ve drafted 2 QB’s Dak, Mike White, and Ben DiNucci. Will McClay was not in charge when any of those other guys you mentioned were brought in. McClay has a good history of drafting so I have faith that the guy they bring in to compete for the starting job would be a good QB, especially if their focus going in to the draft is to find a starter.
User avatar
El Turco
GOTB Fantasy Basketball Ultimate 2x Champion
Posts: 52,137
And1: 20,561
Joined: Apr 11, 2007
Location: Frisco
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#74 » by El Turco » Wed Dec 27, 2023 10:08 am

Like there was a deep run previous 5 playoffs, you expect there would be a deep run next 5 playoffs :lol:

Dallas didnt have a single player taking up so much cap space most of the previous years and still couldnt make the playoffs half of the last 6 years. There will be injuries, and good luck building a deep team that can withstand injuries with no money. I wouldnt be sure about Dallas getting to the playoffs even next year if they pay Dak 60+ million.
TheLowlySquire wrote:Wow, Arda! Huge!


Howard Mass wrote:Arda is not a terrorist. Arda is a good person.
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Analyst
Posts: 3,504
And1: 1,200
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#75 » by Micah Prescott » Wed Dec 27, 2023 2:13 pm

Cactus Jack wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:Under this discrepancy only Mahomes is "that guy". He is the only QB who is "irreplaceable".

But as long as we are a playoff contender I disagree with any major changes. As long as we are a playoff contender we have a chance imo.

I just witnessed my Rangers win a WS going into the playoffs as major underdogs, unable to beat "good teams" before the playoffs started.

And that is MLB where they have to play a full series. In the NFL it is "Any Given Sunday" where even Nick Foles has a shot at getting hot.

Brady was that guy. Mahomes, Rodgers. I would even include Lamar as part of that conversation. As there just isn't anyone like him. But in most cases, it doesn't pencil out.

The Eagles won with Foles in large part because Carson Wentz was still on his rookie deal. They didn't have a QB who was making a lot of money. Same deal with Hurts. But that's going to change over time. It's already starting to show currently, as their depth isn't what it was last season. That's just the reality of the cap. Players get paid & move on.

MLB doesn't have a cap in place. So, the two sports are very different in that regard.


You're trying to suggest that you can't win a SB with a highly paid QB but we see it more often than QBs on a rookie deal. Stafford has the same contact as Dak, at the time huge. He won a ring at age 33.

Rodgers went to the playoffs over and over....only hit ONE TIME.

My point with the Rangers is that they are seen as this year's Cowboys. Heavy underdogs, couldn't beat the good teams. Never in their history could "get over the hump". They finally caught fire in the playoffs.
User avatar
Micah Prescott
Analyst
Posts: 3,504
And1: 1,200
Joined: Aug 25, 2021
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#76 » by Micah Prescott » Wed Dec 27, 2023 2:20 pm

And look, if it were up to me Dak wouldn't get a monster deal. I just like it over the alternative, because the alternative is spending years in a QB hunt just trying to get back into the playoffs.

Again our first pick is in the mid 20s. We aren't drafting the next Mahomes with that. That's a pipe dream.
bluejerseyjinx
RealGM
Posts: 16,666
And1: 3,364
Joined: Oct 18, 2014
Location: Maine
       

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#77 » by bluejerseyjinx » Wed Dec 27, 2023 3:01 pm

Mr B wrote:
Micah Prescott wrote:2000: (11) / Randall Cunningham (3) / Anthony Wright (2)
2001: Quincy Carter (8) / Anthony Wright (3) / Ryan Leaf (3) / Clint Stoerner (2)
2002: Chad Hutchinson (9) / Quincy Carter (7)
2003: Quincy Carter (16)
2004: Vinny Testaverde (15) / Drew Henson (1)
2005: Drew Bledsoe (16)


^^^ All the starting QBs we went through after Aikman retired before we finally found someone decent in Romo

SIX WASTED SEASONS

Most likely this will be what we go through post Dak.

Sure it's possible we just magically luck into the next Mahomes, but it's HIGHLY unlikely


Are you sure you really follow the Cowboys and not trolling us? I mentioned Will McClay before and you seem as if you have no idea who he is or his track record for drafting. He’s been a prominent voice in the draft room (he now runs the Cowboys draft) since 2013. Since then they’ve drafted 2 QB’s Dak, Mike White, and Ben DiNucci. Will McClay was not in charge when any of those other guys you mentioned were brought in. McClay has a good history of drafting so I have faith that the guy they bring in to compete for the starting job would be a good QB, especially if their focus going in to the draft is to find a starter.

Isn't it obvious by now Mr. B. Micah is no real loyal die hard Cowboy fan. He's a Dak Prescott fan and homer trolling Cowboy nation. Its been in front of our face for the past 2 years and we didn't see it till just recently. He want's what is best for Dak, not for the team or organization.
bluejerseyjinx
RealGM
Posts: 16,666
And1: 3,364
Joined: Oct 18, 2014
Location: Maine
       

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#78 » by bluejerseyjinx » Wed Dec 27, 2023 3:07 pm

Micah Prescott wrote:And look, if it were up to me Dak wouldn't get a monster deal. I just like it over the alternative, because the alternative is spending years in a QB hunt just trying to get back into the playoffs.

Again our first pick is in the mid 20s. We aren't drafting the next Mahomes with that. That's a pipe dream.

Hypothetical argument. Lame argument. Your assuming it will take many years for us to find a decent QB. You don't know that. There are other options besides the draft. The advantage of being America's Team is there are many QB's out there right now that would love to be the QB of the Dallas cowboys if ever given the chance.
User avatar
El Turco
GOTB Fantasy Basketball Ultimate 2x Champion
Posts: 52,137
And1: 20,561
Joined: Apr 11, 2007
Location: Frisco
     

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#79 » by El Turco » Wed Dec 27, 2023 3:11 pm

The Kansas City Chiefs selected Mahomes in the first round (10th overall) of the 2017 NFL Draft.The Chiefs, originally slated to have the 27th overall selection, traded up in the draft with the Buffalo Bills for the 10th overall selection


Aaron Rodgers, taken 24th overall, is regarded as one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time and holds the record for lowest career interception percentage


Let's continue with the MVP favorite...

Lamar Jackson was drafted by the Baltimore Ravens in the first round with the 32nd overall pick in the draft, after trading up for the selection with the Philadelphia Eagles.


couple other recent Super Bowl quarterbacks

Wilson was selected by the Seattle Seahawks in the third round (75th overall) of the 2012 NFL Draft


Flacco was drafted by the Ravens in the first round as the 18th overall pick in the 2008 NFL Draft after the team traded out of the eighth overall selection to the 26th, then up again.


8 out last 10 Super Bowls won by a quarterback that was picked outside of top 20 or moved up from outside of top 20. Remaining two, Stafford and Manning, won after getting traded away from their original teams. Idea of needing a high pick to find a good quarterback is not valid.
TheLowlySquire wrote:Wow, Arda! Huge!


Howard Mass wrote:Arda is not a terrorist. Arda is a good person.
bluejerseyjinx
RealGM
Posts: 16,666
And1: 3,364
Joined: Oct 18, 2014
Location: Maine
       

Re: Dak: 4 years, $160m 

Post#80 » by bluejerseyjinx » Wed Dec 27, 2023 3:21 pm

Roger Staubach. Round 10, pick 129.

Return to The General NFL Board